REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Meeting of the Academic Senate
September 18, 2009, 1 p.m.
• Eureka: 7351 Tompkins Hill Road, AD 201 (Board Room)
Members Present: Allen Keppner, David Holper, Colette Beaupre, Trish Blair, Bob Brown, Marjorie
Carson, Dave Gonsalves, Jeff Hogue, Kerry Mayer, Susan Nordlof, Todd Olsen,
Pat Padilla, Mark Renner, Mike Richards, Chris Romero, Gary Sokolow, Danny
Walker, Mark Winter.
Members Absent: Kady Dunleavy.
1. Call to Order: Copresident Allen Keppner called the meeting to order at 1:01.
2. Introductions and Public Comments: Copresident Allen Keppner welcomed all members and
guests, and he announced that because no one was attending the meeting via teleconference,
voice votes could be taken on action items at today’s meeting. Allen called for public
comments; no public comments were offered.
3. Approve the September 4, 2009 Meeting Minutes: On motion by Gary Sokolow, seconded by
Jeff Hogue, the minutes were approved as written.
4. Action Items
4.1 Curriculum Committee September 11 Recommendations: Chair Peter Blakemore presented
the recommendations, and he answered questions. On motion by Gary Sokolow, seconded
by Chris Romero, the recommendations were unanimously approved.
4.2 Eureka Campus Faculty Meeting Schedule Guidelines: Copresident Keppner presented the
proposed Eureka guidelines, and he explained that they are an attempt to schedule meetings
so they don’t interfere with each other. Kerry Mayer moved to approve the guidelines,
seconded by Susan Nordlof. During discussion senators asked if division meetings will be
scheduled, and they stressed the advantages of having regular meetings. Dean Anderson
responded that she intends to communicate with area coordinators to determine the best
meeting time for everyone and to schedule division meetings, but the suggestion was made
that the proposed meeting schedule be followed. Approval of the meeting guidelines
carried by unanimous vote.
4.3 Program Review Form – Request for Full-Time Tenured Faculty Position: Dean Rachel
Anderson presented the proposed form, and she explained that it is intended to be part of
the Program Review process. Jeff Hogue moved to approve the form, seconded by Mike
Richards. During discussion, senators voiced the following questions and concerns: (1)
How is the fill rate defined, and is it the most useful statistic to use? (2) If the form is prepopulated with IR data, will there be room to include a narrative and supporting
information? (3) At the level of this form, new and replacement positions requests will go
into the same hopper. (4) The decision-making process for prioritizing requests is not
clear. How will this information be integrated into budget and planning? (5) The form
needs to be more inclusive and broad-based, maybe even campus specific. (6) In
responding to administrative scheduling requests, the data that would support a new
position has been compromised. (7) It would be useful to know how the data will be
evaluated prior to completing the form. (8) With the prioritization process unclear, will
Academic Senate Minutes
September 18, 2009
Page 2
there be enough time to hire quality candidates for faculty positions? (9) Nonteaching
faculty positions are not included in this form. Because of the number of concerns with the
proposed form, Gary Sokolow moved to postpone consideration of the form until the
October 2 Senate meeting, seconded by Susan Nordlof. The vote to postpone consideration
of the form until October 2 carried unanimously.
5. Discussion Item
5.1
Accreditation Progress Report Draft: Vice President Marjorie Carson presented the draft,
and since the report will continue to be revised until it is sent to the Commission on
October 12, she invited Senate feedback and suggestions for improvement that she will
forward to the writing team. Senate suggestions included the following: (1) Clearly
outline how Program Review will inform planning and budgeting; (2) Directly address the
Commission’s recommendations and provide evidence of what CR is doing to address
those recommendations; (3) Request that the administration demonstrate compelling
evidence of good faith efforts to resolve trust and empowerment issues, and include that
evidence in the Report; (4) Request that the administration commit to Interest Based
Bargaining in the upcoming negotiations, and include that commitment as evidence of
building trust; (5) Include the progress already made with assessment, the training
timeline, and the milestones we expect to reach; (6) Request that the administration allocate
resources to support assessment efforts, and include that evidence in the Report; (7)
Specify what steps are being taken to clarify the roles of the faculty and the administration;
and (8) Include, if possible, an administrative commitment to reinvesting in the Center for
Teaching Excellence and to faculty development. During discussion of how the Senate
would provide additional input to a revised draft before it goes to the Board for review,
senators agreed to schedule a special Senate meeting for Friday, September 25, at 11:30, in
the Lakeview Room. Senators were asked to bring constituent feedback on the most recent
draft to the September 25 meeting.
6. Reports
6.1
Academic Standards and Policies Committee Assignment – Review Tenure Evaluation
Process: Copresident Keppner reported that in response to suggestions from the last two
Tenure Review Committee (TRC) chairs, the Academic Standards and Policies Committee
(ASPC) has been tasked with reviewing the tenure evaluation process. TRC Chair Mike
Richards and a representative from CRFO will be invited to participate in ASPC
discussions to help define the issues and identify areas of mutual interest that the
committee can address.
6.2 Accreditation Update: The accreditation update was addressed during the discussion on the
Accreditation Progress Report draft.
6.3 Spring Schedule Update: Marjorie Carson reported that while the initial communication to
area coordinators was that the spring schedule would be adjusted to include a ten minute
passing time, more recently it has been decided that the passing time in the spring schedule
will be the same as this semester. However, due to budget considerations and operating
costs, the college cannot continue to grow, and the spring section offerings will need to be
reduced. So that students and associate faculty can be notified early, senators requested
that the area coordinators be informed of the scheduling adjustments as soon as possible.
In response to questions, Marjorie clarified that all the district sections, including the online
courses, will be coordinated through Steve Brown and Rachel Anderson.
Academic Senate Minutes
September 18, 2009
Page 3
6.4
Final Budget 2009-2010: Because VP Ruth Bettenhausen was not able to attend the
meeting, the report will be moved to a future agenda.
6.5 Distance Education Ad Hoc Committee: Mark Winter reported that he is working on
coordinating the committee, but the membership has not been confirmed, and meetings
have not yet been scheduled. Mark will present an update on October 2.
6.6 September 13 and 14 Board Retreat and Meeting: Copresident Keppner reported that
concerned community members addressed the Board on Sunday to stress the importance of
maintaining the labs and programs on the Mendocino Coast campus, particularly in light of
the proposal to purchase a new CR site in Garberville, and a citizen’s advisory committee
provided a report to the Board. The Board approved an associate faculty evaluation
process, and they heard a number of reports from the Mendocino Coast campus. The final
district budget was approved, but Board members expressed concerns that CR is going over
enrollment cap for two years without adequate reimbursement from the state. The Board
approved the purchase of the Garberville site, but with certain conditions, including an
analysis of the asbestos in the building and an estimate of the total cost of refurbishing the
site.
7. Announcements and Open Forum
7.1
Presentation of Final CR Budget for 2009-10: Copresident Keppner announced that
President Marsee has scheduled a budget workshop for the college community to explain
the budget assumptions and the budget development process. The workshop is scheduled
for 3:30 this afternoon, Friday, September 18, in LRC 105 (Distance Ed Room). Allen
encouraged faculty to attend the one hour presentation, which will include questions and
answers. The presentation will be available via the distance education link for Del Norte
and Mendocino participants.
7.2 CCLC/Academic Senate Technical Assistance: Copresident Keppner announced that Scott
Lay, president of the Community College League of California, and Jane Patton, president
of the state Academic Senate for California Community Colleges will be on campus
Monday and Tuesday, September 28 and 29, to facilitate a Technical Assistance with the
CR community. In an open forum on Monday afternoon, Jane and Scott will give a joint
presentation on effective participation in district governance, and Tuesday’s format will
include breakout discussions of constituent groups facilitated by Scott and Jane. Faculty,
staff and administrators are encouraged to attend, and Allen stressed that it is particularly
important that faculty in leadership roles attend and participate.
7.3 National Automotive Technicians Education Foundation (NATEF): Mike Richards
announced that NATEF is in the process of a major change in their standards for program
certification, and Mike has been asked to participate in that process at the national level.
8. Adjournment: On motion by Gary Sokolow, seconded by Kerry Mayer, the meeting was
adjourned at 3:21.
Respectfully submitted by Sally Frazier, Administrative Secretary to the Academic Senate.
Next Meeting:
Special Meeting – Friday, September 25, 2009,
11:30 a.m., Lakeview Room, Eureka