Curriculum Committee Minutes
September 16, 2008
Members Present: Jas Bhangal, Begoña Cirera, Michael Langdon, Jim Matthews, Hilal Ozdemir,
Wayne Pitcher, Ernesto Victoria, Patricia Shannon
Ex-Officio
Members Present:
Edna Danaher, Gene Groppetti, Kaaren Krueg, Patricia Posada
Guests: Leslie Capello (Mills College graduate student shadowing Hilal Ozdemir),
Jennifer Lange, Rebecca Otto
I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 2:10 p.m. by committee chair Patricia Shannon.
II. Approval of Minutes of September 9, 2008
Patricia Shannon commented that people actually read our minutes online. Because of that exposure, she asked to clarify the section on SLOACs as follows: While the
Curriculum Committee will be incorporating the SLO forms into our Curriculum process, there will be no action taken until after Flex Day in October.
MSC (Matthews/Ozdemir) to approve the minutes of September 9, 2008, to include this clarification.
III. Liberal Arts AA
Patricia Shannon noted that Jane Church was unable to attend today’s meeting. Patricia gave background on the Liberal Arts degree, stating that due to changes in regulations, our old Liberal Studies degree was no longer legal. Jane presented a revision to the
Curriculum Committee, we approved it, and responding to early positive feedback from the state, published it in our Catalog, expecting that it would be approved.
Since submitting the Liberal Arts AA degree to the state, we have received and responded to three separate requests for revision. We seem to be caught in a “continuous loop.” Patricia asked what direction we should give Jane regarding further feedback/requests from the state.
Jim Matthews reported that the CIO Board meets on Wednesday. He suggested that
Gene Groppetti contact the CIO at Merritt College, who represents the San
Francisco/East Bay Region at the Board meeting, and see whether we can get clarification of the process at the CIO level. Another possibility for information would be the Vice Chancellor of Academic Affairs. Jim also asked where the request goes after it has been approved by Stephanie Low, the Credit Program and Course Approval
Specialist who is currently giving us feedback.
Patricia Shannon reviewed Chabot’s policy that if a course outline of record differs significantly from one college to the other, the college requesting the revision change either the course number or discipline rubric to resolve the discrepancy.

Curriculum Committee
9-16 -08, page 2
At the chair’s request, Jennifer Lange and Rebecca Otto, Chabot Biology instructors, attended the meeting to join this discussion. They reported that the Biology program, and in particular Biology 31, seems to be taking different directions at the two colleges.
Jennifer reported that in Biology 31, each college is interested in having 2-3 topics taught that the other college is not interested in including. While Chabot wants to focus on human organisms to prepare Biology majors and Allied Health students, LPC is treating the class as survey course.
Discussion included:

LPC does not appear to be as strict in their interpretation of “same course” as we are, and are not interested in adhering to Chabot’s “policy.”

How much does the difference between the two outlines affect students?

Can a student who took Biology 31 at LPC still be successful in classes at
Chabot?

The process by which students are allowed to substitute courses taken at other colleges for Biology 31.

Other, similar points on which the colleges disagree, e.g., which college foreign language course is equal to two years of high school foreign language.

Whether the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees are aware of the situation.
Patricia reported that she did bring the situation to the District Curriculum
Council last year with no resulting resolution.

Why Chabot has taking it upon itself to police this issue and “solve” the problem.
Gene voiced the opinion that this is a District Curriculum Council issue.
Patricia summarized the committee’s options regarding Biology 31:
1.
Change the course number;
2.
Do nothing;
3.
Change the Biology rubric.
She added that in her opinion, number 3 is not a good choice. Number 1 would be
“safe.”
MSC (Matthews/Pitcher) that for this academic year we will not have further discussions about changing rubrics/numbers and course divergence. We will send this issue to the district and wait for them to develop a policy and implement it equally at both colleges.
Biology 31 will remain as is. There will be no change in number or rubric at Chabot.
V. Curriculum and Title V Review
Repeatable Courses. Patricia Shannon distributed a summary of Title V. Sections
55040-46.
Begoña reported that she had reviewed the differences between PE 1, 2, and 3, and found that while there is a sequence built within each numbering system, she can see no difference between beginning, intermediate, and advanced courses in the different numbers, (i.e., PE1 Beginning Tennis, is the same as PE2 or PE 3 Beginning Tennis.)
The chair asked Kaaren Krueg to prepare a list of individual PE course outlines and the dates they were reviewed.

Curriculum Committee
9-16 -08, page 3
Edna Danaher pointed out that while most Foreign Language courses are not repeatable, Sign Language courses are. This is one of the reasons Sign Language is not included under the World Languages umbrella.
Submission of new/revised programs to the state.
Jim led a discussion of the state requirement that submission of new/revised programs be accomplished one-week after college approval. Jim wondered if there was a way to send a preliminary packet to the state for feedback at the same time as we submit to Board. Because the cover sheet requires the Board date and
VI.
Chancellor’s signature, this is probably not possible.
Credit/Noncredit
Patricia summarized that non credit classes are classes that don’t transfer. They must meet student need. They are eligible for apportionment. The question of whether they are repeatable was raised.
Next week we will have a quick review of the Course Outline of Record.
Good of the Order
Patricia asked members to think about how we would like to approve proposals this year:
1.
Approve by consensus;
2.
Approve “information only” items without discussion. These would be requests dealing with textbook changes, term length, and assignments and methods of evaluation;
3.
Full review; full discussion on all elements of the presentation.
She added that if everybody thinks about the criteria as they are reading the packets, it will inform the way we prepare for the meetings. She would like the reps to work with the deans to determine in which category different pieces of the proposal should be placed. She will vet the packets or realign them. Individual faculty will not be making these decisions at this time. Patricia will attend the Deans meeting to explain the procedure.
MSC (Matthews/Victoria) that we direct the chair to discuss with the deans and the curriculum reps the criteria for the information only, consent, and major change categories. It was requested that this information be placed on the Curriculum website.
Reminder: complete the stand alone course training webinar by the end of the month. Go to www.cccconfer.org
, click “view meet and confer archives,” and choose “Certification training for stand-alone credit course approval” (August 22, 2008).
VII. The meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
Next Meeting: September 23, 2008, Room 1506. kk 9/117/08 c:\documents\word\curric\2008-2009\9-16-08.min.doc