Regular Meeting
October 24, 2007 – 3:00 - 5:00 p.m.
Board Room, Building 200
IPBC Membership
2007-08
M i n u t e s
Cristina Ruggiero, Co-Chair
Yvonne Wu Craig, Co-Chair
Faculty
Carolyn Arnold
Mike Absher
JoAnn Galliano
Chad Mark Glen
Debra Howell
Joe Kuwabara
Linda Rhodes
Cristina Ruggiero
Wanda Wong
Classified
Rachel Ugale
Yvonne Wu Craig
Administrators
Norma Ambriz
Robert Carlson
Marcia Corcoran
Rosemary Delia
Heidi Finberg
Farhad Javaheripour
Melinda Matsuda
Gerald Shimada
Ron Taylor
Members Present: Cristina Ruggiero, Gerald Shimada, Carolyn
Arnold, Melinda Matsuda, Mike Absher, Chad Mark Glen, JoAnn
Galliano, Joe Kuwabara, Debra Howell, Rachel Ugale
Members Absent: Yvonne Wu Craig, Wanda Wong, Norma
Ambriz, Robert Carlson, Marcia Corcoran, Rosemary Delia, Heidi
Finberg, Ron Taylor, Linda Rhodes, Farhad Javaheripour,
I.
Meeting Minutes – The meeting minutes from the
October 10th meeting were approved.
II.
Discussion of Agenda Items
Reports:
A.
Academic Senate Review of Planning Timeline
When the Planning Timeline was presented to Academic Senate,
mostly positive responses were received. Academic Senate stated
that they will discuss the topic and let IPBC know that status after
their next meeting.
B.
Faculty Prioritization Meeting
Dr. Taylor distributed the Faculty Staffing Priorities for 08-09
memo at the Faculty Prioritization meeting. Some divisions were
concerned when their divisions did not appear on the “Areas for
priority consideration” list in the memo. There were other concerns
raised about whether the information was a guide or a requirement.
Ron has notes from the meeting stating the concerns of those who
were present. He will summarize what the questions and/or
concerns were and will present them at next IPBC meeting Nov.
14th. IPBC will review the comments and also re-visit the memo to
clarify guidelines for faculty prioritization at the next meeting.
C.
Integrating program review with planning and budget
Cristina and Yvonne met with Tom Dewit in regards to program
review. They informed him about IPBC’s recommendation that all
departments in program review should also complete unit plans. In
that meeting Tom also outlined the program review cycle. In
December, Tom Dewit and other Program Review members will
attend an IPBC meeting and to discuss material that has been
produced by programs in Program Review. This will begin IPBC’s
gathering of information to inform the strategic planning process.
Discussion Items:
A.
Cover Letter for Unit Plan
A draft version of the Unit-level Planning memo was distributed in the
meeting. Cristina asked for feedback on the memo. Feedback was as follows:
• Continue reiterating why IPBC is doing this.
• Make the “Purpose” stand out more.
• Should be from the co-chairs of IPBC.
• Cover letter should be about the main changes, not directions.
• First paragraph should be the purpose of the Unit Plan and the body should be
about the changes.
• Express that if something is requested, it should be in the Unit Plan.
• Should not be too wordy on the back page.
• Bullet the following items: Purpose, Resource Allocation, Timeline changes,
due dates, calendar for planning, who uses the document, where the pieces
go, etc.
• New dates, deadlines, etc. should be added.
• The “Unit Plan: Overview and Guidelines” are the instructions for the Unit
Plan. Cristina asked for a volunteer in the meeting to proof the Unit Plan.
Carolyn Arnold is to proof the memo and present the changes at the next
meeting.
B.
Begin developing the Division Overview format
We began the discussion about establishing the division overview. It was
discussed that the Deans should create the format they would like to use. The main
questions for IPBC are, “What does IPBC want to know from the divisions?” What
does IPBC want the Deans to give them? Deans could provide a summary of
ongoing and new activities, for what needs to be incorporated in the Strategic Plan.
The Deans could give this information to IPBC. In developing the Division Overview,
the Deans should be having on-going conversations with their units to determine the
priorities of the division. The committee also had consensus that the Deans should
submit a list of those priorities in order of importance to the division. This would be
communicated in the division overview instructions/request. A draft of these
instructions given the committee’s suggestions will be discussed at the next meeting.
C.
Including the Classified Staff Prioritization Process in Unit Plan
Melinda Matsuda and Gerald Shimada have made the requested edits to this
part of the plan
D.
Priority Objectives and Assignments to Committees
There was a conversation on how this should be handled this year. There was
a discussion that IPBC should request an status update from other committees
regarding the Priority Objectives they are responsible for. A reminder email will be
drafted and sent out by Jasprit to the committee for edits and then send to the
chairs of the various committees.
E.
Accreditation Standard I (Carolyn)
Carolyn Arnold discussed items on the handout “Standard I: Institutional
Mission and Effectiveness.” The first question was “To what extent does the
institution understand and embrace the notion of ongoing planning?” The response
was that there is a disconnect, and there is lack of evidence of a plan embraced,
followed, or evaluated. There is also lack of planning and enthusiasm. The issue
arose that it is difficult to plan without the President, Deans, etc. and that Faculty is
not always consulted when there is growth within a division. Planning rarely evolves
to the next step. Implementation is missing from the Planning and Budget that IPBC
is involved in.
The second question was “Does the college have a planning process in place?
Is it cyclical, i.e., does it incorporate systematic evaluation of programs and services,
improvement planning, implementation, and evaluation?” The response was that
there is a planning process in place. However, it does not incorporate system
evaluation of programs and services.
The next question was “How does college budgeting of resources follow
planning? How is planning integrated?” The response was that there is a
disconnect.
The last question was “To what extent are institutional data available and
used or planning? Are data analyzed and interpreted for easy understanding by the
college community?” The response was that data is available, but it is used
selectively.
Decision/Recommendation
• Approve Final Unit Plan Format
Future Agenda Items
• Invite CEMC to an IPBC meeting
• Faculty Prioritization
• Division Summary
• Email Reminder DRAFT (Jasprit)
• Continue drafting Division Overview
• Set due date for Division Overview
• Accreditation Report (Chad)