REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Minutes of the College Council
7351 Tompkins Hill Road, Eureka, CA, Board Room
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
MEMBERS
PRESENT
Mark Winter, Dave Holper, Ruth Moon, Teagen Teslow, Ron McQueen, Becky
Blatnick (phone), Marcia Williams (phone), Jeff Marsee, Keith Snow-Flamer,
Utpal Goswami, Roxanne Metz, Jolene Gates
MEMBERS
ABSENT
Ahron Cervania, Jose Ramirez, Martha Racine, Mike Wells, ASCR rep (1), VP
of Admin Service (vacant)
CALL TO ORDER
President Marsee called the meeting to order at 2:04 pm.
MINUTES
The minutes of 10/04/2010 were approved as presented.
Ruth Moon welcomed Roxanne Metz as the new constituent representative of
the Managers’ Council.
UNFINISHED
BUSINESS
BP/AP 4240
“ACADEMIC
RENEWAL”
Ron McQueen reported that Marla Gleave, member of ASPC and co-author of
the original 4240 language, would be present at the 10/25/10 College Council
meeting to discuss the details of the original BP/AP 4240 drafts.
AP305.01 and
AP305.03
“FACULTY
PRIORITIZATION”
Dave Holper reported that the Senate faculty prioritization ad-hoc committee and
Dr. Goswami were reviewing final changes to the prioritization model. Mr. Holper
reported that a draft would likely be presented at the 10/25/10 College Council
meeting.
BP/AP4020
“PROGRAM AND
CURRICULUM
DEVELOPMENT”
Dr. Goswami reported that BP/AP4020 “Program and Curriculum Development”
was under review by the Academic Standards and Policy Committee (ASPC).
AP4021
“PROGRAM
REVITALIZATION
OR
DINSCONTINUAT
ION PROCESS”
Dr. Goswami reported that AP4021 “Program Revitalization or Discontinuation
Process” was under review by the Academic Standards and Policy Committee
(ASPC).
BP/AP4231
Support staff noted that an ASPC ad-hoc committee had met to begin work on
“COURSE GRADE integrating the expanded management group’s draft 4231 (Grade Changes) and
CHALLENGE”
the ASPC’s draft 4231 (course grade challenge).
Dave Holper reported that the CR Trustees would prefer not to be the final
arbiter of a grade but would like to participate in the grade challenge process by
ensuring that the grade challenge process is followed according to procedure.
MISSION, VISION, Dave Holper reported that the Mission, Vision, and Core Values ad-hoc
CORE VALUES
committee had met and, after reviewing the District’s current mission statement,
Minutes-College Council
Page 2 of 6
October 13, 2010
the mission statements of other California community colleges, and the output of
the 4/29/10 mission statement workshop, drafted revised mission, vision and
core values statements.
Vision Statement:
College of the Redwoods is a leading learning community where lives are
transformed.
College Council feedback regarding the vision statement included:
 The vision should communicate that the district enables positive life
transformations
Mission Statement:
College of the Redwoods is a public community college that provides
outstanding educational opportunities for those within the unique
communities it serves. By making student learning and success our first
priorities, we assist students in their skills and abilities as life-long learners,
as well as contributing to the economic vitality of the communities. By
continually assessing our students’ learning and our performance as an
institution, we improve upon the educational excellence we offer. To achieve
these ends, we design our policies and procedures and commit our
resources to support this mission.
College Council feedback regarding the mission statement included:
 The last sentence may be implied
 “…provides outstanding education opportunities for those within the
unique communities it serves.” This reference to our intended student
population may not provide enough detail to guide the institution when
important decisions are being considered.
 The CR Ed Master Plan identifies both success and access as primary
goals of the institution. Where is access noted in the mission?
 The potential role of the CR virtual campus is not expressed in the
statement
 The ad-hoc revision committee should consider input from the broader
college community before word-smithing the statements
Core Values:
1) Student Success: Maintaining a student-centered institutional culture to
insure that student learning and advancement are pivotal to all we do.
2) Educational innovation and excellence: Providing quality and relevant
education in transfer preparation, Associate Degree completion,
career/technical training and life-long learning opportunities. CR uses
ongoing and systematic evaluation and planning to improve its strategic
practices and improve student learning.
3) Caring: Nurturing a culture of mutual appreciation, cultivate empathy, and
a compassionate response to others.
Minutes-College Council
Page 3 of 6
October 13, 2010
4) Respect: Considering the talents, feelings and contributions of all in our
interactions and behaviors; practicing active listening and collaborating in
our daily work; basing our relationships on the essential dignity of each
individual, valuing diverse cultures, backgrounds, lifestyle and abilities;
understanding that inclusion makes us stronger and able to perform at
higher levels.
5) Responsibility: following through on our commitments, welcoming
constructive assessment and suggestions for improvement, and meeting
expectations for personal and professional conduct.
6) Honesty: Speaking and acting truthfully, without hidden agenda – saying
when we make mistakes or do not know, avoiding silence when it may be
misleading, identifying and working with each other to communicate and
solve problems.
7) Fairness: Treating students and colleagues equitably, without favoritism
or prejudice, giving all the benefit of the doubt, and providing opportunities
for individual success.
8) Ethical leadership:
9) Participatory governance: Maintaining a culture where all students,
classified /confidential staff, faculty and administers engage in an
inclusive, ongoing and self-reflective dialogue about the continuous
improvement of student learning and institutional processes.
10) Environmental awareness
11) Community development
12) Resources
College Council feedback regarding the ‘core values’ included:
 Specific items mentioned in the mission, vision and values drafts may not
correlate with Pam Fisher’s definitions of mission, vision and values. For
example:
o The phrase in the draft mission statement “…student learning and
success our first priorities…” may communicate a value.
o The phrase in the draft mission statement ‘…assessing our student
learning and our performance…” may communicate a value.
 The draft core values statement lacks reference to the virtual campus
 Change ‘ethical leadership’ to ‘ethical behavior’
 Consider narrowing the values list to six broad values that focus on how
we will interact
Minutes-College Council
Page 4 of 6
October 13, 2010
College Council feedback regarding the revision process:
 The mission, vision, and core values revision process provides a great
opportunity for the college to engage in dialogue to identify who the
college intends to serve and how. The ad-hoc revision committee should
invite discussion regarding these broad themes before specific language
is crafted
 When soliciting broad-based feedback regarding the mission, vision and
values drafts, Pam Fisher’s definitions of mission, vision, and values
should be clearly defined.
 If feedback should be sought through redwoods.edu, the link to access
the feedback mechanism should be clearly noted on the redwoods.edu
homepage
 The mission, vision and core values need to be clear and accessible so
they can be easily understood, adopted, and integrated into day to day
operations and inform the strategic planning process
Dave Holper suggested that feedback be submitted to daveholper@redwoods.edu and that people provide detailed specific feedback using
‘track-changes’ or the ‘comments’ feature of MS Word.
NEW BUSINESS
PROCESS FOR
RESOLUTION OF
COMPETING
DRAFTS
Dave Holper recommended that College Council adopt a mechanism for
resolution of competing policy and procedure drafts forwarded or endorsed by
disparate constituency groups. Mr. Holper drafted the following process in order
to facilitate discussion at College Council.
In the event that there are different policy or procedure drafts before College
Council, rather than try to resolve difficult issues before the Council, the
following procedures will be utilized:
1) College Council will appoint an ad hoc committee and a chair to oversee
the membership.
2) The different drafts will be sent to an ad hoc committee members for
resolution.
3) The ad hoc committee will read each of the drafts and supporting
documents necessary to understand the rationale for the drafts.
4) The ad hoc committee will meet and utilize interest-based problem
solving to find resolution.
5) The ad hoc will first establish the shared interests before trying to write
any draft.
6) The ad hoc will then work create a resolution draft that supports those
shared interests.
7) Once the work is completed, the ad hoc will present its draft to College
Council.
8) Should the ad hoc committee not be able to find a resolution, the ad hoc
will bring back a report on what occurred that led to a deadlock.
9) If the work is successful, College Council will proceed with its review
period decision.
10) If the work is not successful, College Council may opt to provide direction
Minutes-College Council
Page 5 of 6
October 13, 2010
to the ad hoc committee or it may consider a second and different ad
hoc.
College Council feedback regarding the draft process:
 The ad-hoc committee should include at least one member representing
each disparate constituent group
 Once this ‘Process for Conflict Resolution’ is approved, it should be
included in the proposed AP 2511 following scope and operating
procedures
 Mark Winter volunteered to incorporate College Council feedback into the
‘Process for Conflict Resolution’ and present the revised version to
College Council at the 10/25/10 meeting
POLICY AND
PROCEDURE
REVISION
PROCESS
Dr. Goswami noted that the policy and procedure revision process needs to be
clear, well communicated, and incorporated into a regular review cycle.
Dr. Goswami volunteered to draft a process for College Council review.
COLLEGE
Support staff noted that the policy and procedure revision prioritization/schedule
COUNCIL POLICY would likely be presented at the 10/25/10 College Council meeting.
AND
PROCEDURE
REVISION
PRIORITIZATION/
SCHEDULE
INTEGRATED
PLANNING
MODEL
Dr. Snow-Flamer reported that last spring the Program Review Committee and
College Council had agreed on the final process for re-visiting the Integrated
Planning Model (IPM). Keith reported that the IPM co-chairs would make
recommendations for changes and forward the revised IPM to College Council in
October.
Suggested revision forwarded by the IPM co-chairs included:
1. Link the Education Master Plan Functional Committee with the Enrollment
Management Functional Committee
2. Add a description box detailing process changes
Dr. Snow-Flamer noted that the process has only been in place for one year and
we hadn’t had time for the process to work in all its facets yet.
Members of College Council noted that the corresponding Integrated Planning
Narrative would be helpful to evaluate the IPM. Council Members also
requested further explanation of the items noted in the ‘Summary of Recommend
Changes’ box.
Members of College Council noted that the feedback mechanism was not explicit
in the model. Dr. Snow-Flamer responded that the feedback arrows were not
inserted into the model in order to avoid confusion. Dr. Snow-Flamer went on to
note that feedback was very important and would be noted so in the narrative.
Minutes-College Council
Page 6 of 6
October 13, 2010
FUTURE
AGENDA
ITEMS/UPDATES
Dr. Snow-Flamer reported that the next meeting of the Enrollment Management
Committee was scheduled for October 18th. Two important agenda items to be
discussed at that meeting are:
1) Multiple Measures
2) How we place student in courses
Student Representative Teagen Teslow noted that she was concerned regarding
cuts being made to associate professors. Dr. Snow-Flamer reported that he was
scheduled to present the budget planning process and TLU allocation process at
the next ASCR meeting. Dr. Snow-Flamer also reported that DSPS adaptive PE
courses were not being cut.
Dr. Goswami noted that Scott Lay and Jane Patton made multiple suggestions
regarding items that should be presented to College Council. Dr. Goswami
noted that many of the items that Scott Lay and Jane Patton suggested College
Council hear did not currently fall under the scope of College Council. Dr.
Goswami suggested College Council discuss its purpose and scope.
Roxanne Metz noted that while she agreed a fully representative constituent
based group needed to be available to hear grievances, she was concerned with
College Council being able to fulfill this role and accomplish the huge task of
revising and maintaining policies and procedures.
Roxanne Metz also noted that the 2010-2012 Program Review Integrated
Calendar noted College Council as the evaluator of the Integrated Planning
Process. Roxanne suggested this assignment be noted as a future agenda item.
Mark Winter opined that a process and forum for voicing concerns was needed
and agreed that discussion clarifying College Council’s role in the process was
needed.
Dave Holper suggested that College Council consider creating a “Policy and
Procedure Revision Team” based on the Sac City Model. Utilizing a revision
team to assist in preparing policy and procedure drafts would allow College
Council to broaden its scope and still accomplish the task of updating and
maintaining policies and procedures.
President Marsee requested that the Academic Senate, CSEA and Manager’s
Council each select a representative to attend the Los Rios Integrated Problem
Solving Seminar scheduled for Nov. 17th through Nov 19th.
Meeting adjourned at 3:25 pm.
DE