Friday, December 14, 2012, 9am – 11am
New Boardroom
Notes
Present: Rachel Anderson, Cheryl Tucker, Tanya Smart, Jon Pedicino, Jeff Cummings, Mike
Cox, Dana Maher, Hillary Reed, Brie Day, Vinnie Peloso, Erik Kramer, Marcie Foster, Crislyn
Parker, notes
1. Updates: Instructional Template – Not addressed
1.a. A separate staffing form was developed for submission in addition to the program review, to create parity with the faculty prioritization process. The PRC does not recommend staffing requests. The committee’s purpose is to ensure resource requests show a direct link to assessment, planning and/or program review.

Regarding budget resource requests: the concept is that anything under $$2500 will be decided via the appropriate dean and/or director.
1.b. The Tenure-Track Faculty Request Form has been revised to follow the prioritization rubric the prioritization committee uses and was included as an informational item at this meeting.

The faculty prioritization process looks at external factors when prioritizing; all pertinent information should be included in the faculty and staff request justifications, including any other areas a position supports.
2. Student Development Program Reviews ( alpha ):

The PRC will follow this format for evaluating program reviews:
1. Generally the review met the criteria as needed
2. Are there questions, issues, or is more information required; were
indicators included and is the data tied to indicators. If so the review will
go to the appropriate administrator/authors.
3. The PRC will move Red flag concerns to the next level (administrative
oversight)
4. Does the review meet the basic requirements; are resource request justified
and linked to planning.

Advising/Counseling- approved, but slight correction needed for budget totals

ASC – (added to agenda) approved, pending request for assessment update and the
acuplacer indicator addressed.

Athletics-approved motion, seconded, move

CDC - approved

DSPS - approved

Enrollment Services-discussion, good review and moved approved

Library-discussed, moved to return to author for indicators and evaluation

Residential Life-approved, moved to submit to VP Snow-Flamer with facility
safety concerns

Special Programs – Approved

Upward Bound - Approved

Office of Student Development – Approved

Office of VP of Instruction – Approved

Office of Dean, Del Norte - Approved

Office of Dean, Mendocino Coast – Discussed, moved to return to author for revision.

3. Other

Reaffirming membership: Erik Kramer – faculty. (needs to be added to membership list on website)

The committee will possibly need to fill/replace two positions in the spring: a manager representative, as a result of reorganization; and a student representative.

Tiffany Schmitcke volunteered to help with technology during the meetings.

Richard Ries, full-time Mendocino faculty, will be added to the PRC contact list. He will participate when possible, along with Associate faculty, Tanya Smart.

It has been suggested to amend the PRC meeting calendar to every other Friday in the
Spring. Designated co-chair, Rachel Anderson, proposed the committee set the calendar at the January 18 th
meeting. If we move to a twice monthly, a request was made to change from the 2 nd
and 4 th
Fridays to the 1 st
and 3 rd
and maybe begin at 10am. Everyone is asked to check spring meeting calendars.

The instructional program review process: the review goes from author(s) to appropriate administrator by January 18. Final review will be submitted to Office of Instruction for posting prior to Friday, January 25 th
.

The PRC would like to flag areas of concern over safety (not as a program redflag) to the appropriate administrator for follow-up to BPC, as well as concerns on ADA issues.

Resource requests go to the BPC for ranking, following PRC approvals.

Critical reflection is required for all key indicators, and should include changes made to indicators, such as why an indicator was removed, changed, etc.

VP Snow-Flamer prepared a summary of all student development reviews.

There was discussion that VP office reviews be set around the annual plans. The
PRC will continue this discussion at year-end. Discussion also that VP reports need to include key benchmarks.

The committee recommends authors also note if information, data, analysis, and/or justification has been addressed in another section (eg. See S.2.)

The PRC discussed including, in a separate category, all safety issues into a category, and possibly updating the template to include this in the templates. It is the function of the PRC to bring attention to these issues.
Next meeting: Friday, January 18 th
Agenda items: process, spring meeting calendar, general business