College of the Redwoods
Education Master Planning Committee Meeting
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Minutes
Present: Utpal Goswami, Rachel Anderson, Geoff Cain, Ahn Fielding (phone), Pat Girczyc,
Michelle Haggerty, Angelina Hill, Jennifer Knight, Matt Malkus, Roxanne Metz, Julia Peterson,
Mike Peterson, Keith Snow-Flamer, Crislyn Parker-notes
Absent: Steve Brown, DaVita Fraser
1.
Meeting called to order at 8:05 a.m.
2.
Status Update re: Strategic Plan and Education Master Plan Timeline
 Committee will add an agenda item: Scope of the Ed Master Plan
 From previous meetings, and EMP meetings at the sites, themes have been identified
that are common throughout the district, as well as determining site specific needs.
Committee needs to develop strategies on how to create initiatives that are district wide
and site specific; not have different strategies for each specific area, but one initiative
that can be tweaked as needed for various student populations. Identify district needs
and tailor to specific sites.
 Strategic plan update: the draft model links various plans together; the Ed Master Plan
will be linked to the goals and objectives in the strategic plan. The strategic plan is
shaping up into themes that will become recommendations. The Ed Master Plan will
remain a draft until the strategic plan is finalized.
 One element in the strategic plan is a goal/statement about fiscal stability. If this is a
long term goal, will the Ed Master Plan play a significant role and how will it impact
technology planning.
 The college does not have a policy on building reserves or draw-down of reserves. The
education master plan may include a prioritization for excess reserves. (Noted this is
third CR has expanded sites and had to shut down). For example:
o From the Education Master Plan angle, each site should have strategies to deal
with different funding scenarios.
o Language in the Education Master Plan should include upgrading classrooms
and technology and include prioritization. Sentence could read: “the successful
educational experience of students is dependent on appropriate infrastructure
including technology and classrooms.” The EMP process must provide for
renewal/recycling and improvement of facilities and infrastructure.
 The Strategic plan already addresses fiscal responsibility, so all other planning
committees should include the same type of terminology and expand to target the
specific area of each planning committee.
 Clarification is needed in program review on how units will look at inefficiencies and
deal with them. Effectiveness needs to be a part of the evaluation of programs and
services.
 Utpal feels the commission would like to see a number as a target of efficiencies. This
discussion needs to be soon. Then we can let our efficiencies be guided by that number.
 Community considerations must be included, as well as addressing the growing
demographic of students who want alternate class time.
3.
Report on task force work
a. Student success (Keith Snow-Flamer, Michelle Haggerty, Matt Malkus, Angelina Hill):
Action items developed were developed based on three goals (see supporting document
titled Ed Master Plan Subcommittee Student Success, 1/25/12).
 Goal 1: Provide structured academic pathways. Identify needs and holes to make the
first year successful
 Goal 2: Focus basic skills education. The Enrollment Management Committee will
tackle this. It involves determining how we define basic skills success. Our courses need
evaluation and possibly innovation. Evaluation must be built into all plans, to ensure
what we offer is because it works, not because it is what we know. Suggestions included:
o Give thought to provide more resources to make sure our students get what
they need. Personalized counseling works well for some basic skills students.
o Contextualized courses; too many basic skills courses with high unit counts has
not been effective. Show connections in contextualized courses; may be a
student is already utilizing a concept and needs to realize it can be transferred
to another area.
o Explore different learning techniques – innovate.
o Show connections in contextualized courses.
o IPEST program in Washington brings a lot of these ideas together successfully.
 Goal 3: Promote the success of all members of the community equitably: A focus on
online courses for non-traditional students. Not all college offerings need to be transfer;
CTE and others, can be online and evening courses.
 Structured course sequences are considered to work better than non-structured for
degrees. Bullet identifying structured pathways, which will help the Enrollment
Management Committee tie TLUs by degree completion for planning. Another bullet:
Established pathways-design pathways, degree planning tools and advising to choose
right path. Ed code has certain requirements, but creative designing can be made to
allow for structure. Include an alternative when a guaranteed pathway is not available.
 The EMP should address changing demographics and diversity of our students (e.g.
socioeconomic diversity, learning styles, and cultural approach to education).
 Analytics: Collect information on what students are doing. Key for successful analytics
is input, and then analytics can be used along with the human touch – complementary.
 Math testing using technology to determine what students are doing, what they did
previously and how it can help them be successful.
 The Education Master Plan should address the need to track emerging fields and
emerging opportunities and determine if CR can respond to these emerging
opportunities.
b. Business Training Center- next agenda
c. Access to computers and computer literacy – next agenda
d. Cultural relevance/diversity – next agenda
e. Online or hybrid career training- next agenda
 Subcommittee task force report outs will be on the next agenda.
5. Discuss planning for 101 corridor sites
 These sites were created to provide services, and should we decide to shut down some of
them, we need to determine what the community expects from us and what services we


need to maintain. What we do at this time will be strategic and remain over a long
period of time; if we have to downsize what is essential to maintain. The key question to
be considered is that if some sites are closed, what services can be maintained, and what
can be reasonably done to address student needs?
Many students take advantage of the student services offered at the Eureka Downtown
site. Suggested we keep these essential services. Night classes are popular. This site
serves a different demographic population. Issue is not to eliminate all the 101 corridor,
but to address fiscal efficiency overall. Per Utpal, the Eureka Downtown lease is up and
had a lot of built-in costs. If we keep this site, we will negotiate a lower cost agreement
or we will not stay.
Distance does affect student decisions.
6.
Identify initiatives to be included in the education master plan update – next agenda
7.
Discuss Scope of EMP - next agenda
Meeting adjourned at 10:05am. Next meeting date to be determined.