CHABOT COLLEGE ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE
R e g u l a r Meeting
Board Room, Building 200
Thursday, November 15, 2007 – 2:15 p.m. to 4:15 p.m.
A P P R O V E D M I N UT E S
Submitted by Ming Ho
Senators
Applied Technology & Business — Michael Absher
Arts & Humanities — Bill Johnson
Counseling — Rachel Aziminia & Dara Greene
Health, Physical Education, & Athletics — Nancy Cowan & Vacant
Language Arts — Susan Gill & Francisco Zermeño
Library — Jim Matthews
Science & Mathematics — Dave Fouquet & Ming Ho
Social Sciences — Michael Thompson & Vacant
Part-time Faculty — Anne Brichacek
Ex-Officios
ASCC — Jove Meyer, Vice President
CLPFA — Shari Jacobsen, Membership Coordinator
Academic/Faculty Senate Immediate Past President — Chad Mark Glen
Guests
None in attendance
Presiding Officer
President Diane Zuliani
ITEM
1.0 GENERAL FUNCTIONS
1.1 Call to Order: President Zuliani called the meeting to order at 2:15pm
1.2 Approval of the Minutes: None.
2.0
REPORTS
2.1 Senate President: President Zuliani’s prepared statement is below.
Hayward Award—no nominees have been forwarded.
Exemplary Program Award—the application for the Gallery and Museum Practice Program
was completed, signed off by Dr. Carlson and Chad Mark Glen, and has been sent. My sincere
thanks to this Senate for their nomination, and for their support.
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE APPROVED MINUTES
November 15, 2007
Update on compressed calendar—I was unable to attend the informational session, but in
conversation with Ron Taylor afterwards, I learned that a compressed calendar is a more difficult
transition for some than for others, particularly those who teach long class periods. While the FA
is paying close attention to impacts on the faculty contract, my role will be to ensure that impacts
to faculty with respect to our work in the classroom are also fully explored.
Update on the “hours vs. periods” and “must drop” vs. “may drop” issue—remember, the
issue is about the language in the catalog that contradicts the language on the backs of our
rosters. Our rosters say: “A student absent for a total of four consecutive or six cumulative
instructional hours and /or two consecutive weeks of instruction may be dropped from that class
by the instructor.” The catalog says “instructional periods.” Our Division polls clearly indicated
faculty preference for hours, and in fact it turns out that “periods” was a mistake. The catalog
language will be changed to hours. Faculty also nearly unanimously preferred the roster to read
“you may drop any student who is no longer attending” instead of “you must drop,” but this issue
has yet to be resolved, because there is a possibility this phrase actually refers to what we do up
to census day, though it isn’t clear. I cannot say absolutely, but it is my understanding that we
do indeed have to drop a student who has not shown up at all between the beginning of the
semester and census day. I think this whole phrase will need to be rewritten.
Faculty Hiring process—has again engendered some discontent. The tying of campus
priorities to institutional planning just hasn’t gone smoothly. The fact that IPBC provided the list
of hiring priorities did not go over all that well with folks who’s needs were not reflected on their
list. What is happening now is what happened last year, which is that the IPBC prioritization
process is largely being overlooked, and new faculty hires are going to be made the old
fashioned way, in which the faculty representative making the most persuasive argument will
earn the available positions. This is not what Dr. Carlson intended. He expressed his thoughts
to College Council this way: “IPBC is the engine on this train, and faculty and staff priorities
should get in line. There should be no conceptual gap between faculty priorities and institutional
goals.”
[End of prepared statement.]
With regards to the compressed calendar, Senator Matthews, who is on the District
Calendar Committee on behalf of the FA, had comments to add. He attended the presentation
by the VP of Student Services at Ohlone, which is now on the compressed calendar. He
reported that, at Ohlone, they did not have any short term courses in their first year to have time
to think about implications. They were able to move to the compressed calendar because they
had 16 and 17.5 sessions, and the former were filling while the latter were not. So Ohlone
thought that the students were already voting with their feet what they want. Matthews also
revealed that 50% of CCs have compressed calendar or are considering it. He has drawn up
scenarios of different calendar options for the FA, and to help consider the compressed
calendar, he created a scenario based on Ohlone’s compressed calendar. Under that scenario,
classes meetings need to be counted by the minute, not days. Also, classes are scheduled on
157 days instead of 175, so there will be many issues that need to be considered.
Senator Absher pointed out that instructors in his Division are teaching courses that are
already compressed time-wise, and Chabot has more voc ed programs while Ohlone has very
few. Being on a compressed calendar will make for a longer day for an already tight program.
While Ohlone eased into the compressed calendar by not having any short-term classes in their
first year, short-term classes comprise the core of many voc ed programs. Similarly, Senator
2
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE APPROVED MINUTES
November 15, 2007
Cowan shared similar problem for Nursing. Their students share the hospital with other
programs, so they cannot simply add time their students practicum at the hospital because that
would run into the time when students from other programs will be there. Past President Glen
asked if some program can remain on the 17.5 week calendar for programmatic needs while the
rest are on a compressed calendar. Responses to that include difficulty for students in
scheduling classes and knowing when classes start. Matthews suggested that each department
contact its counterparts in other colleges that are on the compressed calendar or that have
considered it carefully. Chabot is relative comprehensive, having a variety of programs, so we
need to go beyond an examination at the college level and focus at the program level instead.
He also reminded Senators that, when compressed calendar was brought up a year ago, people
at Chabot were concerned, not only because of a poor previous experience on the compressed
calendar at Chabot, but because of the construction that’s now going on, which impacts
classroom space and scheduling. So a compress calendar, with further impact on scheduling,
seems like too much going on at once.
With regard to the language on the roster about “may” vs. “must” drop a student, Senator
Aziminia weighed in that the “must” language, if applied for the period before census, could help
her program by providing a way to track the number of students served, thereby getting a better
count for receiving state money. Glen worried that, if the language is must, then that creates
additional responsibility for instructors. Right now, when the class is large at the beginning of the
term, some instructors do not take attendance because that takes up too much time. Senator Ho
suggests that he would like someone to find the statute or regulation upon which the issue of
“may” vs. “must” is decided.
In response to the process of faculty hiring prioritization, Matthews reiterated his view that, in
lieu of a real staffing plan that considers which program should or should not be growing, there is
cannibalization at Chabot, where a program grows at the expense of another. Absher, in IPBC’s
defense, argued that it is the administration who did not follow through with IPBCs
recommendations, contributing to the breakdown of the process. Dr. Taylor first presented to
IPBC a letter, which had IPBC’s name on it, outlining the guidance criteria of prioritization that
the Prioritization Committee was to use. However, when he presented the letter to the
Prioritization Committee, he did not include those changes.
2.2 ASCC: Tabled due to Jove Meyer’s absence.
2.3 CLPFA: Tabled due to Senator Fouquet’s and Representative Jacobsen’s absence.
2.4 Senators
Senator Matthews reported that a statewide textbook summit, concerning the textbooks’
financial burden on students, will take place at Chabot on November 30, 2007. The bookstore
manager Kathleen Kazer is involved in organizing the summit. About 30 people from around the
state and including the State Chancellor’s Office staff will attend. One of the goals is to form an
action committee to address the issues.
Various Senators mentioned open source and public domain material to reduce textbook
cost. President Zuliani has even thought of applying for sabbatical to write her own textbook for
her art history class. Senator Absher reported some problems with textbook ordering of
supplementary books with the Bookstore.
3
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE APPROVED MINUTES
November 15, 2007
Senator Thompson brought up the issue of scheduling for 2008–2009. Due to construction,
he was not able to be provided with necessary information such as classroom availability and
the number of seats in each class room. He also suggested that we make sure the equipment in
each room be double-checked, so we know if it is suitable for instruction. Perhaps we need to
rent equipment? President Zuliani reported that one of her adjuncts has quit working at Chabot
because the college has made it difficult for her, in terms of providing a classroom environment
conducive to instruction in art history. Senator Absher suggested that this is something Dr.
Taylor needs to look into. He also mentioned that he has experienced classes that are
scheduled into rooms that do not fit the enrollment.
2.5 Public Comments:
President Zuliani reported that Saturday’s Daily Review carried the headline that “Second
proposed plant not supported…Energy Commission’s staff rejects Hayward facility due to
location.” This would be good news if it wasn’t exactly the same thing that happened with the
Russell City Energy Center, which was also rejected by CEC staff, and then the rejection later
overturned by two chief CEC Commissioners. Unfortunately, those are the same two
commissioners who are on the Eastshore case. The CLPCCD is filing a petition to intervene,
which is a huge amount of work and must be in the CEC’s hands by Monday.
3.0
ACTION ITEMS
3.1 Creation of a Green Campus Committee
Senator Matthews distributed a draft Green Campus Committee framework that Senator
Zermeño and he put together. He raised the question whether the issue of a green campus
belongs to the District, the College, or the Senate. There are issues involved that fall under the
control of the District, not Chabot. President Zuliani expressed that it is not related to Senate
purview, while the goals are laudable. Past President Glen suggested that the Senate take a
strong stance of support of the concept while not forming a Senate committee.
M/S/C (Matthews/Absher) unanimously that the Senate support the concept of a college or
district committee that addressed the issues in the framework drafted by Senators Zermeño and
Matthews. President Zuliani will discuss with Dr. Carlson and Dr. Kinnamon about achieving the
goals outlined in the framework.
4.0
DISCUSSION ITEMS
4.1 Campus Notification Regarding Power Plants
President Zuliani reported that the CEC staff has rejected the East Shore power plant
application. However, she encouraged everyone to be vigilant and continue to attend public
hearings on the matter, as the CEC staff similarly rejected the other power plant but the CEC
Commissioners went against the staff recommendation.
Dr. Carlson was invited to speak to the issue of power plants, as the record shows that he
had been notified in December 2006. He did not appear but instead sent a memo addressed to
Zuliani. The part read to the Senate follows:
Thank you for your invitation to speak to the Faculty Senate. However, I will be unable to
attend due to a previous commitment off campus.
4
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE APPROVED MINUTES
November 15, 2007
As a side, I feel that we as a campus did not serve our community well on the matter of
the power plant(s). We had a wonderful opportunity to demonstrate critical thinking at the
highest level, to be an institution of open thought and access to all kinds of information on
this multifaceted issue. We could have held forums on a variety of topics surrounding the
need for energy conservation and production, as well as air quality, and brought information
from all sides of this particular issue to the community. We should help bring the full
discussion of matters like this one into the open for all to participate, learn and decide.
Fault could be distributed in many quarters for this omission. Issues like this “click”
differently with different people. However, I am disappointed that I did not see the scope of
the communities concern early and therefore did not take the initiative I should have to
prompt an open discussion of the issue on the community’s behalf.
So you know, I learned of the smaller power plant in December 2006 from a visit by Tierra
Energy representatives (I do not know what the CEC is talking about when they say they
provided information to us. I never got any information about either power plant from them
and did not know myself about the Russell plant until the discussion was underway last
summer). My response to this information was to make the community and College aware by
offering to host the public CEC hearing on the matter in January 2007. Flyers announcing the
public hearing were posted on campus (I checked that personally) and notices sent to the
neighboring community and announced in the local paper. Buses were made available to
tour the prospective site. The hearing on campus was very poorly attended, which I
interpreted as an indication of the level of interest at the time. In all there were at least five
public hearings (Hayward City Hall December 2006, Chabot College January 2007, Hayward
City Hall March 2007, Life Chiropractic College West in April 2007, Hayward City Hall June
2007) in the last year (and several additional in the years before that), bus trips to the sites,
websites dedicated to the issue, and frequent mention in the Business Times, and local
papers. So while the information could, and in retrospect, should have been better circulated,
there is also the case to be made that there appeared to be a general lack of interest until it
was too late in the game.
[End of Dr. Carlson’s memo.]
President Zuliani felt that that Dr. Carlson’s argument—that a lack of attendance by the staff
and faculty at the hearing at Chabot in late January indicated a lack of interest—is not genuine,
because his attempt to tell the college of that meeting was weak, and he knew of important
information before and after that hearing but did not share it with campus. Now that we know,
the college is scrambling to protect itself, but we may be too late. For Carlson to ask “where was
the discussion” is disingenuous, and painful. She believes that it was his obligation to inform the
college of such a major development in our vicinity, especially because he had early knowledge
of this plant. Past President Glen remarked that, in private discussion with Dr. Carlson on the
matter, the gist of Dr. Carlson’s response is that, because of where he grew up in the Midwest,
he just didn’t think it’s such a big deal, to which Glen replied that we are in Northern California
and we have a different paradigm of thinking. Zuliani responded that Dr. Carlson is entitled to
his way of thinking, but he has an obligation to the college to communicate with us on an issue
of this magnitude, and he had an obligation to consult a variety of sources, not just the power
plant owners. For instance, she wonders if he is aware of results by the Air Board on the
projected effect of the power plant. Senator Ho also echoed that Dr. Carlson’s arguments for
lack of community interests are not genuine. No one present at the Senate meeting remembered
5
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE APPROVED MINUTES
November 15, 2007
such flyers regarding the power plant hearing back in January. Also, most faculty do not reside
around Chabot, so there is no reason for them to read the Daily Review, nor do most of us read
the Business Times. Further, an issue of such importance should have warranted a memo to the
faculty by e-mail or in mailbox. We currently get a weekly announcement of administrative,
faculty, and classified openings in our mailboxes, so in comparison, the issue of the power plant
appears to be less important than job openings. Senator Matthews added that, in the
accreditation report from 1996, communication was an area found needing improvement. The
Hotsheet now coming out of the President’s Office was created in response to the accreditation
finding, yet how ironic that the power plant issue was not even printed in the Hotsheet.
It was questioned whether a letter could be placed in Dr. Carlson’s file regarding this
negligence to inform the Chabot community of the Russell City power plant. Senators Absher
and Matthews expressed it may not be worth the effort since Dr. Carlson only has a few months
left, but Ho added that he will remain in the District nonetheless. It was also mentioned that
whoever replaces Dr. Carlson should have the advantage of learning from his mistake.
Past President Glen suggested working with the Classified Senate on the issue of Dr.
Carlson’s lack of communication with the Chabot Community. The Senate directed President
Zuliani to draft a letter to Dr. Kinnamon and the Board of Trustees on the matter.
4.2 Enrollment Management Criteria for Cutting Classes: Tabled due to Dr. Taylor’s absence.
4.3 Title V Curriculum Updates and AS Degree Report: Tabled due to Dr. Taylor’s and Dr.
Shannon’s absence.
4.4 Revisions to Letter of Civility
President Zuliani did not send out the letter of civility as directed because, after reflecting on
the amended letter, she felt that deleting the section to address Senator Greene’s concern took
away the purpose of the letter. After some discussion, Senator Greene stated that she can
accept the original wording, and the Senate reapproved the letter of civility as amended.
4.5 Administrator Evaluation
President Zuliani provided a handout of the District’s philosophy regarding adminstrator
evaluations, and of the schedule for the last several years indicating which administrators had
been evaluated. There is little evidence of them happening lately, but in conversation with Dr.
Carlson they actually do seem to be on track, just more irregular than they should be because so
many administrators have left, and so many others are too new. The ideal is to conduct six
evaluations per year to maintain a three-year cycle for administrative evaluations. New hires are
not evaluated in their first year. A list of the administrators currently up for evaluation in the
2007/2008 evaluation cycle has been distributed to all Senators.
5.0
REPORTS II
5.1 Senate Committees: None.
6.0 GOOD OF THE ORDER
6.1 Future Agenda items
6.1.1 Cameras in Labs; Banner Chart of Accounts — Farhad Javaheripour
6
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE APPROVED MINUTES
November 15, 2007
6.1.2 Title V Curriculum Updates & AS Degree Report — Dr. Patricia Shannon
6.1.3 Textbook Expense — Kathleen Kaser
6.1.4 Enrollment Management Criteria for Cutting Classes — Dr. Ron Taylor
6.2 Adjournment at 4:30 PM. Next Meeting: December 13, 2007
6.3 Fall Meetings: 2nd & 4th Thursdays.
December 13.
(*Special Meetings not on 2nd or 4th Thursday)
MLH/DZ
7