CHABOT COLLEGE ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE
Board Room, Building 200
Thursday, March 2, 2006– 2:17 p.m. to 5:05 p.m.
A P P R O V E D M I N UT E S
Submitted by Jane Church (2:17 - 4:00) and Barbara Ogman (4:00 - 5:05)
Senator Attendance: Applied Technology & Business (Michael Absher); Counseling (Sally
Stickney & Jane Church); Health, Physical Education, & Athletics
(Nancy Cowan & Ross Shoemaker); Arts & Humanities (John
Komisar); Language Arts (Stephanie Zappa & Francisco Zermeño);
Library (Norman Buchwald); Science & Mathematics (Dave Fouquet
& Ming Ho); and Social Sciences (Barbara Ogman & Michael
Thompson); Adjunct Faculty (Anne Brichacek).
Guests:
Dr. Ron Taylor (Vice President, Academic Services); ISLS Faculty:
Julie Segedy, Don Skiles, and Susan Sperling; Tatiana Almendral;
Carol Baumann; William B. Johnson; Gurpreet Kaur; Kathy Kelley;
Julee Richardson; Yvette Schopp; and Kip Waldo.
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 2:17.
1.2 Approval of the Minutes: President Glen thanked Norman Buchwald
for doing the minutes of February 23, 2006. Francisco Zermeño moved
to approve the February 23, 2006 minutes and Michael Thompson
seconded. The motion carried with minor revisions made by Norman
Buchwald and Stephanie Zappa. President Glen suggested putting a
box around resolutions so that they can be recognized easier, and
Senators concurred.
2.0 REPORT S
2.1 College President. Dr. Robert Carlson said he didn’t specifically have a
report, but asked if we had any questions. John Komisar asked
basically, if a program is suspended and not eliminated, would the cost
be different to suspend and start the program up again? Dr. Carlson
explained that the state process is such that you can have a program on
inactive status for 3 year period. Dr. Carlson doesn’t want to suspend it
and then bring it back without a plan for reviving the program. Dr.
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
March 2nd, 2006
Carlson considers is "indefinitely suspended" until he sees the program redesign
report. He added that it really depends on how good a product ISLS produces.
Sally Stickney asked about the Health Information Technology (HIT) program.
She said that the Interim Dean of Health, Physical Education and Athletics, Dale
Wagoner said it was on "inactive status". Sally Stickney’s asked if it could be
revived. Dr. Carlson stated that “Inactive Status” is a term used by the State
Chancellor's office. Stickney asked, on the campus is it inactive or suspended?
Dr. Carlson clarified that the HIT program will be eliminated. We don't have a
program discontinuous policy/process that has been approved by the Board of
Trustees. Dr. Carlson says it will be adopted... but it isn't now. President Glen
feels that the Program Revitalization/Discontinuous Process has been "vetted
through” both college governance processes and agreed to at the district.
Mike Absher said that the Peralta College District is requesting a bond to pay for
benefits. He asked if our district could do the same with a bond. Dr. Carlson
described the constraints of using BOND money. Essentially we must pre-pay
benefits for potential retirees. Fear is that rates or payout will be so high that we
won't be able to keep up. So we prepay those benefits. It's not a building bond at
the Peralta District. It’s a COP (Certificate of Participation) bond where the
revenue is to pay off a debt. That is essentially borrowing money to pay off a debt.
There are a couple of districts going for property value increases, we can't do that.
Stephanie Zappa reading comments from Language Arts faculty: “The L.A. division
requests an extension of two weeks (until March 16th) for presentations re:
programs and the current budget cuts. These are serious matters that deserve
due consideration because of their direct impact on Chabot students. The draft
timeline does not allow enough time for faculty presentations.” Dr. Carlson is not
willing to change the due date for presenting to the Board. Dr. Carlson offered
some personal time on Monday or Tuesday before he sends the proposed cuts in
to the Board.
President Glen reviewed the Ad Hoc committee timeline that was handed out. On
the March 7th, Dr. Carlson will not be in that meeting. Dr. Carlson suggested
adding presentation time onto that Wednesday, March 8th meeting. Dr. Carlson
commented that he would prefer to be at the committee meeting to hear the
discussion first hand.
Francisco Zermeño: Speaking about classified staff and questions, “Do they have
to be let go?” Dr. Carlson response is that the contractual language is 30 days
notice for terminated classified positions. He said the college will extend the
notices to terminated classified personnel until June 30th. Zermeño: commented
on the problems of keeping class commitments and that working with the classified
is difficult. He says there is not enough time. Dr. Carlson says it is unfortunate,
but he is not willing to extend the deadline to report to the Board.
2
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
March 2nd, 2006
Michael Thompson asked why the deadline is so far in advance of his contractual
obligation for notification of layoffs. Dr. Carlson restates that these decisions were
given careful considerations and he is not willing to drag it out because the
classified staff will be left hanging for an extended period of time. President Glen
mentioned that this is a Reduction in Force (RIF) and there is a ripple effect when
bumping occurs. Dr. Carlson said it is a hard decision to make and we have to
deal with it.
President Glen suggested that the budget allocation model problem needs to be
revisited. He asked for an explanation about the status of revisions to the
allocation model. Dr. Carlson believes that year after year the allocation model
has done the most damage to Chabot and our ability to operate and our ability to
run our programs. Dr. Carlson has been charged by the Chancellor with designing
a different allocation model and has begun work on it with LPC President, Karen
Haliday. President Glen put out a request for Senators to contact Dr. Carlson if
they would like to work on the new ideas for the allocation model.
Barbara Ogman says she knows that the budget cuts did not come easily, that she
hears Dr. Carlson’s frustration, but suggests that part of the frustration comes from,
supposedly we act under shared governance and we didn't do that with this budget
cutting process. She suggests that maybe we may have reacted differently if we’d
have been a part of the budget cuts discussions. One solution that is not going to
work is to delay the decision.
2.2 ASCC. No report.
2.3 CLPFA. No report.
Public Comments: Kathy Kelly: I am concerned about the arbitrary nature of
long-term curriculum & budgetary decisions OUTSIDE the shared governance
process. Both staff development & program discontinuation process undercut the
process to which this PUBLIC institution is bound by law & obligation. Further the
numbers based on which decisions are taken are PURELY Theoretical and
program discontinuance is presented as if it included program participants.
Whereas the President has already stated here that he is “not willing” to consider
continuation of ISLS, making the “work done by relevant faculty” totally moot. The
President’s unavailability belies his willingness to cooperatively & collaboratively
make sound, long term educational decisions.
Bill Johnson states that as a faculty member he is very worried and disappointed
that there is not student inclusion in the Ad Hoc committee membership. We are
making a mistake by not having representation from the students.
Susan Sperling read from her notes that there was a process that should have
been followed. Commented about the Ad Hoc committee and feels like that
compounds the problem. She called this committee a “charade of a process”. A
3
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
March 2nd, 2006
senior faculty asked to be put on the committee has refused because they don’t
want to be associated with this process. She is sorry for being blunt…Asking for a
response by the Senate.
Dave Fouquet responding to Susan Sperling said he has asked Tom DeWit to
participate because enrollment management data needs to be apart of the
discussion. Given the nature the way the committee was set up, Tom DeWit is
“stepping off”, and he is not going to participate. Dave Fouquet says he is waffling
and he feels that there are "some things" that could be disastrous.
Susan Sperling questions how the committee was made up. Dave Fouquet says
it needs more time. President Glen said that Dr. Carlson is not the Chair of the Ad
Hoc committee. Our governance process states that a chair is selected by a
committee at their first meeting. President Glen suggested that Dr. Carlson merely
be in the room as an observer. Stephanie Zappa states that it appears that Dr.
Carlson is a "self appointed" chair. President Glen stated that this body can redraft
that resolution and he will bring those changes to the committee. Dave Fouquet
says ISLS is "suspended" not cut. ISLS is tasked with coming up with a
restructuring... bottom line...it's a matter of restructuring. It's basically what you
guys were told in December. Susan Sperling says that Dr. Carlson said that the
ISLS program was being ended. She feels that the faculty makes these kinds of
decisions. She suggests that the Senate make a resolution to suspend this
"charade" of the Ad Hoc committee. Dave Fouquet also feels "compromised by
this whole thing". John Komisar suggests that we need to be aware of the
consequences and that the Board of Trustees will act regardless of what we do or
don't do. Susan Sperling feels the Board of Trustees is aware of how this all
"played out". John Komisar suggests that in the future there ought to be a very
clear sequence of events to direct the president on how to proceed in matters like
these.
Carol Bauman says that she agrees with Susan Sperling and. feels it is
"management by crisis” and it is not a process of "shared governance".
Kip Waldo stated that he is concerned about "larger questions" like the spirit of this
college, how people are pulling off and trying to save programs. He fears the
wrath of "arbitrary cuts” when we look at something like this happening and it's
time to "stop and think"... He doesn't believe the budget information one bit. He
asks "where's the accountability"?
Julee Richardson offers an “objective voice” saying that Dr. Carlson did not get a
"road map" on how to be president. She says he wasn’t president at another
institution (Julie was corrected, as Dr. Carlson was a former president). Julee says
it’s “like the power that I have in my classroom"... "I like that power of academic
freedom". Julee feels that Dr. Carlson "is probably trying to do the right thing".
She also feels that he shouldn't chair this Ad Hoc committee.
4
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
March 2nd, 2006
Stephanie Zappa read comments from Language Arts faculty member Shoshanna
Tenn: “Two years ago we had PFE money to grow creative, exciting, student
centered programs at Chabot. Out of this money came Springboard, Service\
Learning and CHARLIE. These programs help students learn and have already
become part of the Chabot Culture, and DARAJA; ISLS. Chabot’s art gallery,
forensics team, and TV studio make us an outstanding; particularly strong campus.
To cut these programs now is shameful and ultimately self-destructive.”
Francisco Zermeño states that if the allocation were to be correct we would not be
in the fix we’re in now. We should go to Board of Trustees and say "no cuts until
the allocation model is corrected.”
John Komisar feels the reason Dr. Carlson had to do these things is because
Chancellor Cota told him to do so and we should go to the chancellor. President
Glen said we did go to her. Her response was to "support the College President".
President Glen pointed out to the chancellor that the one-time monies did not go to
faculty or staff for input, but just went to management. Dr. Cota said this (one time
monies) needs to go college wide.
Mike Absher doesn't agree with Susan Sperling. Stating he has seen the Board of
Trustees work from a position of "fear", they are almost always extremely
conservative in how they act. He doesn't feel it will make any difference at the
Board of Trustees level. The other alternative is to "walk through this process" and
then, if necessary, say it was a “sham”. We can make that same statement at the
end of the process. By stepping aside, we complained, he formulated an
opportunity, and we shouldn't be stepping aside at this point. John Komisar feels
that whatever we do, the end result will be the same.
Sally Stickney commented that the process we have put out there has engaged
the college. She feels that we need to go forward with the Ad Hoc committee and
feels there are still some misconceptions about what is going to happen to these
programs. Maybe, at the end of this process we can come up with some
suggestions.
Michael Thompson asked when the Board of Trustees is going to consider it. The
timeline distributed shows the Board acting on this item at their March 21st
meeting.
3.0
ACTION ITEMS
3.1 Living Tree Memorial for Faculty Retirees (Emeritus): Francisco Zermeño
wanted to table 3.1 to address more important issues and did not read the
resolution. However this Action Item was moved to approve by Stephanie Zappa
and seconded by John Komisar. The resolution reads:
5
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
March 2nd, 2006
Whereas, Chabot College has been losing trees to old age and more will be
uprooted for new facilities construction;
Whereas, replacing these trees is environmentally responsible and aesthetically
pleasing; and
Whereas, Chabot College is also losing our older Faculty to retirement;
Therefore, be it resolved that upon faculty retirement, with Faculty Emeritus
status, faculty be provided the opportunity to have a tree planted in their name
so they are not forgotten, and their legacy of contribution to the college and our
students lives on.
The motion carried.
3.2 District Curriculum Council Charge: President Glen clarified that this was not a
draft. He also mentioned that the two Faculty Articulation Officers (CC and LPC)
were included as voting members. Francisco Zermeño moved to approve the
District Curriculum Council Charge below, and Michael Absher seconded. The
motion carried with one abstention.
District Curriculum Council Charge:
Each college in the district has a Curriculum Committee, a subcommittee of the
Academic Senate, which is responsible for ensuring and preserving the academic
integrity and quality of all courses and programs at that college. Specifically, the
College Curriculum Committees are primarily responsible for curriculum, degree
and certificate requirements, grading policies, education program development,
and standards or policies regarding student preparation and success.
The District Curriculum Council shall not usurp any of the responsibilities with
which the College Curriculum Committees are charged. Rather, the District
Curriculum Council shall be responsible for
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
Facilitating communication and cooperation between the two colleges on all
matters charged to the College Curriculum Committees
Working to achieve mutual agreement on curriculum shared by the two
colleges and making recommendations about curriculum matters to the
Academic Senates at both colleges
Recognizing areas where the two colleges have different environments,
cultures, and educational needs, and acknowledging the colleges’ needs for
local control of curriculum in those areas
Analyzing and formulating recommendations for district-wide curriculum
matters for referral back to the College Curriculum Committees for analysis,
revision, and possible adoption
Providing a forum to discuss curriculum related matters that may have a
district-wide impact.
6
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
March 2nd, 2006
Group Reports To:
College Academic Senates and Chancellor
As set forth in AB 1725, Education Code Sections 53200 and 53203, and District
Policies 2014, 2015, and 2016, the College Academic Senates have as a primary
function to make recommendations with respect to academic and professional
matters. Specifically, the College Academic Senates have power to make
recommendations to the Board of Trustees with respect to all matters concerning
curriculum, and the Board of Trustees must “rely primarily” on those
recommendations.
As set forth in District Policy 2012, “[T]he Chancellor shall maintain over-all review
of all college operations to avoid duplication, encourage coordination, increase
efficiency, and execute Board policies […including ensuring that …] Policies
relative to students shall be uniform throughout the District with respect to
admission, scholarship standards, and graduation requirements “ […and…] “In
order to provide for district-wide coordination and to enhance communications, the
Chancellor shall organize and establish coordination devices.”
With these roles in mind, all matters which the District Curriculum Council
considers will return to the College Academic Senates for approval or disapproval.
If either or both of the College Academic Senates disapprove, the District
Curriculum Council will facilitate discussions that must lead to referral of revisions
back to the Academic Senates.
Membership and Leadership:
Chair: Vice Chancellor of Educational Services.
Voting Members
2 Academic Senate Presidents (CC and
LPC)
2 Curriculum Committee Chairs (CC and
LPC)
4 Faculty at Large(2 CC and 2 LPC),
Appointed by Academic Senate Presidents,
including one Vocational Faculty from each
college, if possible
2 Counselors, Appointed by Academic
Senate Presidents (CC and LPC)
2 Faculty Articulation Officers (CC and
LPC)
2 Vice Presidents of Academic Services (CC
and LPC)
Ex-officio Members
1 Vice Chancellor of Educational
Services (votes only in case of
a tie)
2 Administrators from Student
Services (CC and LPC)
2 Instructional Deans (CC and
LPC)
2 Institutional Researchers (CC
and LPC)
2 Students (CC and LPC)
2 Faculty Association
Representatives (CC and LPC)
7
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
March 2nd, 2006
Voting Members:
The college’s Academic Senate President must approve any faculty alternates.
There must be a quorum during a meeting requiring a vote. Voting by proxy is not
allowed.
While all members of the Council take seriously the charge of the Council, the
voting members have a special duty to develop expertise in curriculum matters, to
attend all meetings of the Council, to thoroughly review all matters presented to the
Council before voting, and to abstain from voting in situations where the Council
member is not adequately prepared to make an informed decision.
Appointments By:
Academic Senate, Administration, Associated Students, and Faculty Association.
Term:
Two Years. It is expected that voting members will serve for a minimum of two
years, and may serve longer if so selected by their constituency.
Meeting adjourned at 5:05
Below are Agenda Items not covered today due to time constraints and will be
covered at a future date:
4.0
4.1
4.1
4.2
4.3
6.0
DISCUSSION ITEMS
Ad Hoc Budget Cuts Review Committee: Friday 3/10/06 is the joint meeting of
College Council, Academic/Faculty Senate, Classified Senate, and IPBC to hear
the Ad Hoc Budget Cuts Review Committee’s findings. Dave Fouquet states that
Tom DeWit has stepped off this committee. It's a surprise.
(Jane Church left the meeting at 4:00 PM and Barbara Ogman took the minutes
from this point on.)
Program Review and Program Closure Process: Tabled.
AS Degree Survey: Tabled.
Board Policy 2260: Political Activity: Tabled.
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Counselors Assigned to Divisions— Mike Absher;
2006-07 Draft Strategic Plan— Laurie Dockter;
Cheating Update— Melinda Matsuda;
50% Law State Task Force— Zappa/Zermeño;
College Council and IPBC Charges
Program Introduction Process— Ron Taylor;
Construction Effecting Scheduling of Classes— Stephanie Zappa;
8
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
March 2nd, 2006
Curriculum Committee— Mike Absher;
General Education Reciprocity Program Certification— Jane Church;
Online Instruction— Rick Moniz
Adjournment— Next Meeting— March 23rd*, 2006
Spring Meetings— 2nd & 4th Thursdays: April 6* & 20*; May 4* & 11*
(*Special Meetings— not on 2nd or 4th Thursday).
J C / BO /C MG
9