CHABOT COLLEGE ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE
Room 3902
th
Thursday, September 8 , 2005 – 2:20 p.m. to 4:40 p.m.
A P P R O V E D M I N UT E S
Submitted by Michael Absher
Senator Attendance: Applied Technology & Business (Michael Absher); Counseling (Sally
Stickney & TBA); Health, Physical Education, & Athletics (Nancy
Cowan & Ross Shoemaker); Arts & Humanities (Bill Johnson);
Language Arts (Stephanie Zappa & Francisco Zermeño); Library
(Norman Buchwald); Science & Mathematics (Dave Fouquet & Ming
Ho); and Social Sciences (Barbara Ogman & Michael Thompson).
Representatives:
ASCC: (Ashnika Narayan, Vice President). CLPFA: (Dave Fouquet,
Vice President).
Guests:
Dr. Ron Taylor (Vice President, Academic Services), Bridgitte
Kovakou, (ASCC Student Trustee), and Elizabeth Orme (student).
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 2:20 p.m.
1.2 Approval of the Minutes: Michael Absher moved to „approve the
Minutes of August 25th, 2005 as amended and Barbara Ogman second.
The motion carried. Amendments included moving the items from 6.0 Good
of the Order to the end of 4.8 Shared Governance with the inclusion of a
lengthy discussion placed before it by Stephanie Zappa and Barbara
Ogman. „Also, under minutes item 2.2 CLPFA Report Dave Fouquet
added that faculty freedom issues around Article 26 are being discussed
and Profession standards committee notification issues would be a faculty
optional issue. „Michael Absher moved to approve the Minutes of May
26th, 2005 and Nancy Cowan second. The motion carried. „Sally
Stickney moved to approve the Minutes of May 12th, 2005 as amended
and Michael Absher second. The motion carried. Amendment was made
by Michael Thompson to make sure we add the statement, “We don’t want
to balance our books on the backs of our students.” Also, to add that the
Senate forwarded (by Senate President Glen) our picks to the district and
elsewhere stating which concerns the Senate felt strongly about.
1
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
September 8th, 2005
2.0 REPORTS I
2.1 College President: No report.
2.2 CLPFA: Dave Fouquet reported that „the FA is trying to incorporate a
clause about Academic Freedom and Individual Academic Freedom Rights.
Dave feels „the District is dilly-dallying at this point in the negotiations, but it
looks like around a 4% raise maybe in October and „the big issue at this
point seems to be about the maintenance of Insurance Plans and Health
Benefits issues’ like how to pay for the increased costs.
2.3 Public Comments: Mike Absher .
3.0 ACTION ITEMS:
3.1 Elect Senate Vice President. Mike Absher was nominated and was the
only candidate. He was elected unanimously.
4.0 DISCUSSION ITEMS
4.1 Faculty Hiring Process: Senate agreed to move this item to the top of the
agenda to include Dr. Ron Taylor in the discussion, since he needed to
leave for another meeting.
Dr. Taylor and President Glen outlined key points of the hiring prioritization
process. Stephanie Zappa proposed a 2:1 ratio of Faculty / Administrators
for this Hiring Prioritization ad hoc committee. Ron Taylor stated that might
present a problem, due to the size of the committee slowing the process just
because of its size. Bill Johnson asked, “Where is the big Picture” in this
process? President Glen stated that the institutional big picture is framed
within our Governance Structure through IPBC, which crafted the college’s
Vision, Mission, and Goals. Michael Thompson stated that it seems “We
need more Student Data” in the process. Michael Absher stated that the
data is still without significant flaws and errors and that numbers alone
aren’t enough to make the correct decisions. Barbara Ogman asked, “Why
don’t we just get better numbers from CEMC?” and President Glen said it’s
a matter of Quality vs. Quantity of data. The data is only one part of the
equation. The numbers do not tell the whole story. Bill Johnson gave the
example of Spanish Instructor Francisco Zermeño (the only Full Time
Faculty in that discipline) with 7 Adjunct Instructors staffing the rest of those
2
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
September 8th, 2005
classes. Johnson asked, “Shouldn’t we be looking at what we are good at and
how do we take the best advantage of what we are excellent at doing?” With the
enrollment numbers only, we can’t make the best decision. President Glen
explained that in the committees’ meetings, we only have the information that is
presented, which can be skewed and incomplete. Sally Stickney said there is
also the question of areas like counseling and Soft (student) Data vs. Hard Data.
President Glen said, that perhaps not only this data, but also our hiring needs
and recommendations from our Unit Plans, etc. needs to be looked at when
prioritizing staffing needs. Ron Taylor clarified some of the procedures
concerning faculty’s role, voting and presentations in the process. Michael
Thompson asked, shouldn’t our 1st question be starting at a big picture for
Chabot? ASCC Vice President, Ashnika Narayan asked “How are we sure that
the data is demonstrated correctly?”
ASCC Student Trustee, Bridgette
Kovakou, asked, “Why are we questioning the data?” President Glen said the
process all starts with IPBC receiving a package of comprehensive data. Ron
Taylor said the data could be placed in a large spreadsheet and distributed and
that IPBC has been doing a better job at the task they were initially given.
Michael Absher asked that the raw data be given to the Ad Hoc Prioritization
Committee. President Glen stated that the data could be given to the Ad Hoc
Committee and the IPBC for guidance. Bill Johnson stated that the bottom line is
still the College President makes the final division. And how do we get buy-in at a
couple of levels? President Glen said that Dr. Carlson’s record is that he doesn’t
typically override the committee’s recommendations. Stephanie Zappa asked if
the process is reasonable and in compliance with the 75/25 Goal? Dave
Fouquet clarified that the 75/25 is a District Wide Goal and the discussion is at
the Faculty Association bargaining table. Sometimes the issue is positions based
on (counseling) numbers and sometimes the issue of students per full time
Counselors. Michael Absher asked if the LPC Faculty Position Selection
Process example that was passed out, was a model that the whole district needs
to decide on? Ron Taylor said it was just an example and not a District wide
process that needs to be adopted by both campuses. The purpose of this
discussion is a way of reviewing the process and this way questions can be
settled like, do we need 2 reps per Division? President Glen said another issue
to be decided is, whether to allow faculty to present proposals to the Ad Hoc
Hiring Prioritization committee? Dave Fouquet explained that he doesn’t think
anyone is trying to set a formula for the data to be sifted with. Bridgette
Kovakou asked whether the data is really useful? Michael Absher replied that it
is sometimes useful and sometimes suspect. Bill Johnson says this is a
percolating down, tedious process. President Glen replied, yes, that can be an
unintended component of shared governance. Michael Thompson asked that
maybe we can tweak the process somewhat at Level I. The Ad Hoc Committee
should have a lot of faculty to guide the process. Michael Absher proposed that
3
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
September 8th, 2005
the Level I Ad Hoc Committee should have two faculty from each of the 6
Instructional areas, plus 1 each from Academic Services areas. President Glen
says this step would be would an action item at the next meeting. And we need
to move the agenda. Discussion ends.
4.2 Senate 2005-2006 Goals: Dave Fouquet said one of his big goals for senate is
defining what the District Curriculum Council is and what real power do they
yield? „Michael Absher said we should resolve issues as to the A.A. and A.S.
degree philosophy. „Michael Thompson and Stephanie Zappa say we need to
describe our Senate responsibilities. Truly, what is the power of IPBC, College
Council and Academic Senate? Those are the big 3 governing bodies. Also, we
should attempt to describe what shared governance is. „Barbara Ogman said,
in light of the last semester’s Senate request that administrators undergo training
at the District, she asked for follow up on what happened.
Stephanie Zappa noted the time was 4:15 pm and moved for a 20-minute
extension of the Senate meeting time, Norman Buchwald second. The motion
carried.
4.3 Strategic Cost Management: President Glen discussed the K. H. Strategic
Cost Management information (a large document). Michael Thompson asked if
each Senator could get a copy of the K. H. Document? There was discussion
about the meaning of what was the column “Feasibility” and what really does
“Proceed” mean? It was noted by President Glen that the report was to move
forward through Chabot College and have feedback to the District By November
1st 2005. Michael Thompson asked, “What happens when the colleges make
recommendations to District Task Force? President Glen noted that ultimately
Dr. Cota would make the final decisions based on the feedback. Therefore, it is
important for faculty to be involved in the process and make the needed
recommendations. Michael Thompson said that in the past District changes are
not always implemented. Aren’t the District & Administrative Costs heavy, and
that is not so for the colleges? Ming Ho asked, “Don’t we put pressure on
through the Board of Trustees? President Glen pointed out that he would
provide a complete copy of the report to each senator. Stephanie Zappa asked if
we all needed to read this? Or what? President Glen said that Senators should
contact faculty who have expertise or interest in strategic cost management to
review the information. Area and programmatic costs are listed in the report.
Michael Absher noted time had expired. He asked for another extension of 5
minutes to give a report of the Facilities Committee. Unanimous approval for the
extension was allowed.
4
ACADEMIC/FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
4.4
September 8th, 2005
Program Revitalization/Discontinuance Process: Tabled.
5.0 REPORTS II
5.1
ASCC REPORT.
ASCC Representatives have been Appointed and
Homecoming Plans are moving forward and continuing to be developed.
5.2
Senate Committees. Michael Absher reported that the Facilities Committee
was moving to implement four classrooms outfitted with different technologies
as a trial of the technology enabled classrooms (smart classrooms). Input to
the Facilities Committee was requested due to the importance of these
changes.
6.0 GOOD OF THE ORDER
6.1
Future Agenda Items
6.2
Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
6.3
Next Meeting: Thursday, September 22nd, 2005 at 2:15 p.m. Room 3902.
6.4
Fall Meetings: 2nd & 4th Thursday, 2:15 - 4:15 p.m., unless designated
“*special”. 10/13, 27; 11/10, 17*; 12,8, 15*.
MA/CMG
5