Academic Senate Meeting
April 1, 2016
AGENDA ITEM 3.0
REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
REGULAR MEETING OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE
College of the Redwoods
7351 Tompkins Hill Road, Eureka, CA – Board Room – SS 202
883 W Washington Blvd, Crescent City, CA – Room E8
Friday, March 4, 2016
1:30
MINUTES
Members Present: Connie Wolfsen, Stuart Altschuler, Tim Baker, Mike Dennis, Kady Dunleavy,
Phil Freneau (by phone), Deanna Herrera-Thomas, Ed Macan, Ruth Moon, Jon Pedicino, Kerry
Mayer (for George Potamianos), Mike Richards, Wendy Riggs, Sandra Rowan, Lisa Sayles, Sally
Urban, Quang-Minh Pham and Mark Winter.
Members Absent: Mark Renner
Guest Speakers: Michelle Haggerty, Kerry Mayer and Karen Reiss
1.
2.
3.
4.
Call to Order: Co-President Connie Wolfsen called the meeting to order at 1:30 PM
Introductions and Public Comments: Co-President Connie Wolfsen Members of the audience are
invited to make comments regarding any subject appropriate to the Academic Senate. None
forwarded.
Approve February 19, 2016 Academic Senate Minutes: Co-President Connie Wolfsen presented
the minutes and explained why Co-President Mark Renner was absent. On a motion by Mike
Richards, seconded by Sandra Rowan, there was a reminder from Ruth Moon, who was
participating by phone last meeting, to be careful speaking into mics and to turn off mic when
not speaking, as the rustling of paper and laughter interfere with hearing the meeting over the
phone with any clarity. The minutes were approved as written.
Action Items
4.1
Approve February 26 Curriculum Committee Recommendations: Michelle Haggerty
(filling in for George Potamianos). On a motion by Lisa Sayles, seconded by Mike
Richards, the recommendations were discussed. Michelle explained that there was a
heavy agenda this meeting, but submissions will settle out over the next few meetings.
There being no further discussion, the recommendations were unanimously approved
by roll call vote: Altschuler – y; Baker – y; Dennis – y; Dunleavy – y; Freneau – y; HerreraThomas – y; Macan – y; Moon – y; Pedicino – y; Mayer – y; Richards – y; Riggs – y;
Rowan – y; Sayles – y; Urban – y.
4.2
Approve Faculty Qualifications Committee Recommendation: On a motion by Kerry
Mayer, seconded by Wendy Riggs, the recommendations were presented by Michelle
Haggerty. Questions about the process were answered, and the recommendations were
approved by roll call vote: Altschuler – y; Baker – y; Dennis – y; Dunleavy – y; Freneau –
y; Herrera-Thomas – y; Macan – y; Moon – y; Pedicino – y; Mayer – y; Richards – y; Riggs
– y; Rowan – y; Sayles – y; Urban – y.
Academic Senate Meeting
April 1, 2016
4.3
5.
AGENDA ITEM 3.0
Approve February 25 Faculty Development Committee Recommendations: Kerry Mayer
presented the worksheet and explained the committee’s rationale for decisions. On a
motion by Mike Richards, seconded by Jon Pedicino, the recommendations were
discussed. Kerry answered questions about the request to ship furniture, and that she is
working with the applicant’s Dean to figure out how to help Laura Mays find funding.
There is money left over, so we will have a third round call next week. The
recommendations were approved by roll call vote: Altschuler – y; Baker – y; Dennis – y;
Dunleavy – y; Freneau – y; Herrera-Thomas – y; Macan – y; Moon – y; Pedicino – y;
Mayer – y; Richards – y; Riggs – y; Rowan – y; Sayles – y; Urban – y.
Discussion
5.1
Review ASPC Revisions to AP 7123 Contract Faculty Appointment Procedures/Internal
Search: Karen Reiss presented the procedure and some background on what the
committee has been discussing. This is not the final draft, but ASPC wanted this
discussion by Senate regarding the parameters of the Internal Search. This may help
create a better version in the end.
•
Internal “Transfer” instead of “Search”. The MOU uses the term, we will
make sure what it is.
•
The interim language is in use, now.
•
Hypothetical: A program with faculty at two sites; an internal transfer
takes place, and a faculty member from DN transfers to EKA leaving the
program at DN without FT faculty. Is it two programs or still just one?
•
Do we usually include references to other procedures? In this case it’s
only a number, and not content. Clarify by adding the NAME of the AP
4021.
•
‘Consultation with the area dean and discipline faculty” was good
language, should it be in the new version? MOU language was used,
again. Also the analogy of following a similar progression for the
revitalization process.
ASPC will continue working on AP 7123, and will bring it back to Senate for discussion
when they have a ‘final draft’.
5.2
Administrative Reorganization and Implications for Senate and its Committees: Connie
Wolfsen reported that the reorganization that will be in place as of April 1, involves
creating a Dean of Students, and moving two programs that have Directors (Nursing and
Police Academy) to report to the Chief Instruction Officer (CIO), and two programs that
were under HPEA (Addiction and Early Childhood Education) to CTE under Dean Marla
Gleave. Athletics, with two faculty, will be under Joe Hash as Dean of Students. We bring
the issue of committee representation to discussion as we have historically followed the
Administrative structure. We would like to hear of ideas how to handle the Senate
structure, in order to be fair in representing all factions.
•
Senate represents faculty, how big will Senate be? (that will be known
once we decide about the structure)
Academic Senate Meeting
April 1, 2016
•
5.3
AGENDA ITEM 3.0
Possibly be proportionally? Maybe Associate Faculty, nonteaching with
new counselors, and teaching faculty: voting would be necessary
•
the nonteaching word is bad…some “nonteaching faculty” do a lot of
tutoring. At large? Instruction and Student Development
•
Every time the administrative org changes it throws the Senate into a
tizzy. Ad-hoc committee??? To create models that may work
•
We have had many iterations of structure, and Directors have used the
same structure – but if they only have one faculty or few, what
happens?
•
Unique programs should have a representative
•
Directly affected faculty have been invited to a meeting of the Senate
Executive Committee on March 11 to discuss the revisions of models
•
Every discipline thinks they are heard, Cross-trust with disciplines may
be the next step
•
Bylaws limit representation; Numbers don’t tell the whole story.
•
Director vs Dean? Directors are programs and Deans are academic;
communication problems in that Directors are left out of the loop
•
TLUs? Proportion could expand to percentages (a picture would be nice,
anyway, whether it is helpful here or not)
•
Some depts. don’t have full time faculty, only associate
•
All faculty represented, and we must faith in the process and each other
•
Different disciplines have a different perspectives
•
Associate Faculty teach half the classes and should have more
representation
•
Counselors have a different perspective
•
April 15 is the deadline to determine structure (census of faculty)
•
History would be helpful; look back on past
•
Ad-hoc, small, nimble group
•
Ad-hoc volunteers: Stuart Altschuler, Ruth Moon, Mike Dennis will all
join the meeting March 11
•
Joe Hash is the Dean of Students
•
LRC is not a unit, it’s a building; “library services”? clarify terms
Faculty Committee Assignment Loads: Connie Wolfsen reported that at the Faculty
meeting they asked for comments about reducing committees, an assignment for the
mentoring group is coming up, and that will give us a few more people for committees,
but there is still a huge committee overload for faculty. Identify members that are
appointed by Co-presidents. Mentors will communicate their preferences to the Senate
office. The biggest job for Co-Presidents is coming up with representation for faculty
commitments on committees. We seem to still be adding committees instead of
reducing them. Stipends for AF are available for some committees for one semester and
involved District committees with the exception of the Academic Senate seats (two
Academic Senate Meeting
April 1, 2016
5.4
6.
AGENDA ITEM 3.0
Senators for Associate Faculty). CBA will have to include this detail for next year if we
want to continue these stipends. Contentious discussion, getting volunteers for reps
contract specifications, no enforcement of contractual obligations. Workload is another
factor that hasn’t come up. Fill load and contractual obligations is a problem. Would
there be a consensus to begin a point system or something? Makes sense and chairing
committees is a big load, too. How do we quantify some workloads? Committee to
reduce committees; never heard what came of that. Meetings were increased. SARTCO
was involved. A Santa Barbara College has developed an elaborate list of commitment
issues which involved a lot of compilation work. It would be great to do that, but the
daunting learning and data entry curve is problematic. Researching the work loads of
each committee is a good way to start. Start small, sort committees, tier one, two, level
a, b, c… Chair responsibilities are more expansive, but some come with reassigned time,
and that needs to be accounted for. Contractual implications must be considered, also.
The Senate alone could not tackle the whole thing. Use one or more CRFO/Senate
Liaison meetings to create an archetype. Three tiers were made during the AF
discussion. Spreadsheets, rubrics, are good. Systemic issue is administrative support
having been cut back, to help other committees. Transparency issue, one hand not
knowing what the other is doing and the impact. Having committees report to the
Senate would be a nice thing. Maybe committee chairs could all get together to help the
evaluation and write-up. Have all the info in one place. This is an ongoing project.
BP/APs for review: Connie Wolfsen (Attachments)
•
BP 4223 Academic Recognition On first page, please consider changing
to “Honor’s list”, “Dean’s list” (instead of Vice President’s list), and
“President’s list”. Stuart Altschuler made a motion to move it to Action,
and Deanna Herrera-Thomas seconded the motion. Roll call vote
approved (Phil Freneau was not on the phone, and Ruth Moon had
stepped) to move it to action: Altschuler – y; Baker – y; Dennis – y;
Dunleavy – y; Herrera-Thomas – y; Macan – y; Pedicino – y; Mayer – y;
Richards – y; Riggs – y; Rowan – y; Sayles – y; Urban – y. A friendly
amendment was suggested. Stuart moved to approve the AP. Then a
friendly amendment by Tim Baker was made to change “Vice
President’s list” to “Dean’s List”, and Jon Pedicino seconded. A vote was
then taken to approve the amended BP and was approved by roll call
vote: This will go to College Council’s next meeting, and Keith may make
it an interim.
•
BP 4230 Grading and Academic Record
•
AP 4230 Grading and Academic Record
•
AP 4222 Remedial Coursework: Thirty-unit max is Title 5? Basic Skills
would like to review. Debbie sent it to Erin Wall/BSI for feedback.
Reports
6.1
ASCR Update: Quang-Minh Pham was congratulated for being a super student
(newspaper article)! He hadn’t seen it, but a Senator supplied him with the copy. His
report: in a few weeks ASCR will host training for 10 senators; the clothing exchange
Academic Senate Meeting
April 1, 2016
7.
8.
9.
AGENDA ITEM 3.0
was very successful; bylaws changes for interim Vice President; and elections to
promote student activity. Nice sea change to have such interest.
6.2
Ad-Hoc Co-President Search Committee Update: Tim Baker reported that the search has
been unsuccessful, so we continue the search with a few changes. We should have
something for the next meeting. Issues were regarding TLUs and fair compensation.
Extra burden on DN faculty, as it is prohibitive for them; the committee asked Senate to
consider expanding the pool by adding Chairs who would be considered qualified,
though they haven’t officially been on Senate. The bylaws would have to reflect that
change. Very small pool of time and people (so many faculty are already
overcommitted). Potential-ish scenarios were discussed.
6.3
College Council Update: Connie Wolfsen reminded everyone to review Policies and
Procedures that are out for Constituent Review!
6.4
College Update: Mark Winter offered a heads up - deans asked to identify faculty to
manage the websites, please ask your Dean; a goal over spring break is to move to Evoq
for the CR websites; please contact your Dean if you want to be the point person for
specific sites; SARTCO signed a few agreements, some are assigned; there are two open
positions for assessment coordinator for 18 TLUS and a call for interest in Associate
Dean positions, which ends this year and the net goes out for those positions, please let
the CIO/CSSO know. George has set the precedent by serving for one semester. You
won’t offend current assoc. deans! We currently have 5 students who violated student
code of conduct, and who were identified by efforts of faculty, BIT and residence hall
personnel.
Future Agenda Items: Senators are encouraged to request to place an item on a future agenda:
none
Announcements and Open Forum
8.1
Spring Break March 14 – 19!
8.2
Upcoming CR Events – (http://inside.redwoods.edu/calendar.asp)
Adjournment: Motion to Adjourn/Second by Mike Richards/Sandra Rowan; meeting was
adjourned at 3:10 pm.
Academic Senate Meeting
April 1, 2016
AGENDA ITEM 3.0
Public Notice—Nondiscrimination
College of the Redwoods does not discriminate on the basis of ethnicity, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, color or disability in any of its
programs or activities. College of the Redwoods is committed to providing reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities. Upon
request this publication will be made available in alternate formats. Please contact Debbie Williams, Academic Senate Support, 7351 Tompkins
Hill Road, Eureka, CA 95501, (707) 476-4259: Office Hours, M-TH - 8 am to 3 pm; F - 10 am to 5 pm (hours vary due to meeting schedules).
Next Meeting:
April 1 (no foolin’)