College of the Redwoods Education Master Planning Committee Meeting

College of the Redwoods
Education Master Planning Committee Meeting
Friday, September 09, 2011, 2011
1:00 – 3:00 p.m., Eureka Downtown Room 111
Meeting Notes
Present: Angelina Hill, Pat Girczyc, Anita Janis, Geisce Ly, Mary Grace Barrick, Davita Fraser,
Kathy Goodlive, Julia Peterson, Juana Tabares, Roxanne Metz, Geoff Cain, Steve Brown,
Michelle Haggerty, Ahn Fielding, Ahn, Paul DeMark, Paul, Michael Dennis, Utpal Goswami,
Parker, Crislyn – notes
Supporting Documents (attached):
Education Master Planning Overview – Klamath-Trinity Instructional Site
Educational Master Plan Supplements, Themes from Initial Advisory Committee Meetings
1. Overview of process for developing area-specific education master plan supplements:
An initial meeting will be held (done) to provide needed background information for the
discussion, followed by brainstorming, a prioritization of educational needs, and the
development of an approach for partnering to provide needed programs and services.
CR staff and faculty will explore and evaluate the ideas generated by the committee and
make recommendations for next steps.
The committee will review CR recommendations and identify the overarching goals,
specific objectives, and possible strategies for achieving a service area education master
plan in support of the college’s district wide education and strategic plans.
2. Summary of Recent Activities:
The Education Master Plan (EMP) was approved by the Board of Trustees in 2009.
The Mendocino Coast EMP supplement, developed by a constituency group, includes ten
recommendations and was approved by the Board of Trustees in January, 201.
The Del Norte draft supplement was approved by external advising committee but has not
yet been to the Board.
Utpal noted we need to develop supplement plans as “chapters” to the EMP for Southern
Humboldt (SoHum), 101 Corridor (101), Klamath-Trinity (KT) and the virtual campus (VT).
The initial plan was to complete these sequentially but it was decided, for budget and
planning, that it is better to integrate and do them in concert.
Initial advisory meetings: SoHum met in March, 2011, and the 101 Corridor and KT
committees met in June, 2011. In comparing meeting notes from these groups, nine general
themes were summarized, as noted in the attachments. Many of the advisory committee
themes are related to the district themes, and are not just site-specific. This reaffirms our
district education master plan.
Key elements of the District’s Educational Master Plan include:
o Reducing barriers to persistence
o Improving basic skills
o Increasing the number of students who enter the workforce with high-paying jobs
o Increasing the number of transfers to four-year institutions
o Increasing distance and online education opportunities
The Mendocino Coast and Del Norte EMP are/will be available on the website.
3. Themes from Advisory Committee meetings (recommendations from Mendocino Coast
and Draft Del Norte education master plan supplements, themes from initial advisory
committee meetings in Klamath-Trinity, Southern Humboldt, and Eureka/101 Corridorsee attachment for detail)
KT Themes:
o Request we keep in mind information gathered from community forums and the Strategic
Plan of the K-T Joint Unified School District.
o Rely on Hoopa Tribe’s Economic Development Plan and Education Department’s
Strategic plan.
o Monitor HCATEP’s career and technical education goals (green energy, construction,
early childhood education, police, and natural resources-which aligns with District
o Student persistence and basic skills attainment.
o Other tribal and non-tribal needs – tribes get community support, but the community is not
just tribal members.
o Make big changes; for example, partner with corporations.
o How to bridge high school to college (prepare CR students for four-year institutions).
o Utilize the early college high school model.
o Provide education that has cultural relevance to area.
SoHUM themes:
o A strong need for community education (repeated theme).
o The need for computer skills and basic skill and advanced skills.
o Work readiness skills – showing up on time, dressing right etc.
o Child care services training– demand exceeds supply.
o Transportation.
o Solar, alternative energy, environmental energy.
o Water academy program (water/wastewater).
o Theater/performing arts.
o Other themes: lifelong learning, Spanish, ESL; general professional development and
acknowledgement of the need for partnerships (it was noted that CR is not in a position to
fund huge initiatives without community support. It was also noted that over half the
themes would be not for credit education and self supporting).
Utpal is recommending rejection of the current bids for renovating the SoHUM site. The
bids are high because to renovate the entire building for classrooms, (including structure) we
are forced to build to DSS standards. Most needs will be occasional, so there is not
justification for complete renovation. Instead, repairing the exterior and making the interior
useable allows us to spend less, provide needed purposes, allow the community use of the
building, and have CR presence. Education master planning will proceed on the assumption
that CR will have something, but first we must determine the best way to proceed. CR’s
commitment is to provide education not restore a building. Utpal clarified that if we continue
to own the Garberville space, we can use it for non-credit training which does not have to
meet DSS standards. If we don’t do anything structural except, for example, add a bathroom
and paint, take care of health and safety, we can use the building as is.
Pat suggested the use of technology for interactive conferencing which will utilize the
building even if only a few students are physically present.
101 Corridor Themes:
o Need to identify careers and educational pathways.
o Need for private, corporate partnerships – Advisory committee members want a fresh
approach to education. Making education relevant to the community; connecting with the
community to give inspiration (this theme was discussed in the strategic planning
committee-how to offer education to different types of people).
o The 101 advisory committee learned about the business training center and its scope.
Since many people in the district were unaware, this led to presentations to the board
regarding the potential funds that can be generated with this type of educational model,
and the economic clean energy grant.
o The community would like to see CR as the first place the community will go to look into
education. Julia referenced the smog training program that became possible through CR.
o The 101 chapter/supplement must be sure to look ahead.
o Reducing bureaucracy; Think out of box; Rethink how to better utilize the sites.
Regarding whether basing educational master planning on geographical location was good
planning, it was noted that right now, the district needs to show what we are doing and how
we are allocating funds. This discussion was part of the strategic planning meeting held on
9/8/11; that we have types of students different that other areas and what we do must be
relevant; find issues and applications that spark interest and is relevant
There must be agreement on what assumptions will be used in how we look at factors and
allocate funds, by asking what the value of being here is and what we want to spend.
Facility master planning ties into the educational master plan in the following order: strategic
planning, educational planning, facility planning, budget planning, integrated planning, etc.
4. Explore and evaluate themes
Since classes and programs are developed primarily to meet state, WASC and federal
standards for credit courses, can we use sister organizations to enable out of the box
education? Per Utpal there is currently a bill in circulation that allows educational courses
given outside state funding.
While there is some anecdotal data on what the sites mean to students, further research may
be necessary. It is noted that geographically the Eureka main campus has more southern
Humboldt county students, whereas Eureka Downtown draws more Eureka populations, and
Trinity people tend to go to Arcata and McKinleyville.
Too many unique themes are challenging to manage. The nine themes summarized (see
attachment) should meet the needs of all the sites. Utpal would like a sense of whether the
summary is controversial or realistic.
5. Develop recommendations for next steps
For profit school or charter school?
Look at patterns for programs that can be developed and rotated to different geographical areas
(many needs are overlapping)
Further explore qualitative and quantitative reasons of how and why students use the sites
Plan site purposes
Develop more predictable academic schedule
Get student feedback
Get business/community feedback
Bring general themes back to the educational master planning committees and ask how fits into
their view
Ask advisory committees if they expect we should be meeting changing student needs?
Asked and answered that substantive change should not impact planning
Three Educational Master Planning committees will be meeting in the next week. People may
send an email to Utpal and/or Roxanne with any suggestions or recommendations for these
committees, to get meaningful reactions and what ideas to explore.
Meeting adjourned
Next meeting after October 20, 2011