ACADEMIC SENATE
COLLEGE OF SAN MATEO
csmacademicsenate@smccd.net
Governing Council Meeting
Oct. 23, 2007 minutes
Members Present
Jeremy Ball
Diana Bennett
Lloyd Davis
Rosemary Nurre
Martin Bednarek
Teresa Morris
Eileen O’Brien
Linda Phipps
James Robertson
Brandon Smith
Kathleen Steele
President
Vice President
Secretary
Treasurer
Counseling
Library
Student Services/Counseling
Math/Science
Social Science
Language Arts
Language Arts
Accreditation Team Members Attending
Marie Smith, team chair Former Vice Chancellor, Instruction and Technology
Paul Gomez
Trustee
Kimberly Perry
Vice President of Instruction
Steven Reynolds
Interim Dean, Liberal Arts and Sciences
Andreea Serban
Vice Chancellor, Technology and Learning Services
Los Rios CCD
Chaffey College
Reedley College
College of the Siskyous
South Orange County CCD
Others Attending
Jennifer Hughes
Dan Kaplan
San Matean
ITS
VPSS, CSM
AFT
Jeff Mosher
Eric Raznick
CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 2:15 pm. The agenda was approved, with New
Business item E, Code of Ethics, postponed to give divisions time to discuss it. The minutes of Oct. 9, 2007
were approved. Jeremy welcomed members of the accreditation team, including team chair Marie Smith. She
said the team will be her two and one-half days. It will hold open meetings for members of the campus
community Oct. 23 at 5 pm and Oct. 24 at 2 pm, and will give a preliminary report Oct. 25 at 1:30 pm in the
Choral Room. Marie Smith said the team is looking at our self-study and is gathering evidence by watching
campus activities in progress. About 50 people on separate teams are visiting Skyline and Canada this week.
Marie is the coordinating chair for all three teams. They visited the district office all morning on Oct. 22 as
context for their visits to the colleges.
Brandon Smith announced the second “Talking About Teaching” forum, Friday Oct. 26, 2-3:30 in the SoTL
center, 12-170, focusing on using ePortfolios to document student and faculty accomplishments. The first forum
Sept. 21, on using WAC and ePortfolios for ISLO assessment, was well-attended. Eileen O’Brien announced a
job fair with 70 employers, Oct. 23, 10-2 in Building 5. Jeremy invited those members of the WASC
accreditation team in attendance (listed above) to introduce themselves, and thanked them for attending.
Jeremy reported he has been attending CIP II construction meetings for the last two weeks, as well as the allcollege meeting Oct. 17. In the confidential meetings Jeremy was invited to offer up advice, but that
participation did not represent shared governance since he could not take information back to the group. For
that reason his comments at those meetings are his alone, and do not represent Governing Council or the faculty.
VICE PRESIDENT’S REPORT At its Oct. 19 meeting, the Distance Education Advisory Committee
(DEAC) reviewed the proposed SMCCCD distance education guidelines. Decided we should hold since the
committee is revising the booklet of guidelines on distance edncation. The online certificate came up: we want
to continue, Patty Dilko said will be sending revisions. Dan Kaplan asked whether a subcommittee has been
assigned the task of rewriting the policy statement. Kathy Blackwood, Marilyn McBride, and Canada faculty
members Danny Castillo and Linda Hayes are among the members of the committee. Jeremy said – will
rewrite, bring back to DEAC to be sent through the senates.
FACULTY APPOINTMENTS Five faculty members have agreed to serve on the Basic Skills Initiative (BSI)
Committee: Brandon Smith, Juanita Alunan and James Carranza from Language Arts, counselor Sylvia
2
Aguerre-Alberto, and Harry Nishanian, the go-to guy in the math department for basic skills. Others will be on
the committee. Brandon said several campus programs focused on basic skills are represented, including WAC,
ESL and the Math Resource Center, and it would be nice to have someone active in the Learning Communities
confluence model. He suggested Jon Kitamura, current cochair of learning communities. Kathleen supported
that suggestion and noted Juanita Alunan is involved in English 800 and the Writing Lab. Members accepted
having three members from English on a committee with only six faculty, in view of the central place of English
in basic skills. Jeremy pointed out members are representing faculty as a whole, not just in particular areas.
MSU to approve the six faculty members for the committee.
NEW BUSINESS – FACULTY VOTE ON PLUS/MINUS GRADES In early 2006 Governing Councils at
CSM and Canada passed resolutions supporting +/– grades, but Skyline narrowly disapproved. Since the
colleges are not unanimous, Jeremy suggested to District Academic Senate (DAS) a vote of all district faculty.
This will be an action item at the next DAS meeting. Jeremy asked if after a year and a half Governing Council
still supported plus/minus grading and wanted him to vote in favor of having an all-faculty vote. He is
concerned Skyline might feel we are impinging on them. Their Governing Council has said no, yet we pursue it.
Jeremy said one of Skyline’s concerns about +/- grading was some CSU schools would recalibrate GPAs, so +/wouldn’t count. In fact, Title 5 has changed, so that plusses and minuses are no longer irrelevant. UC also uses
them. C– is not passing at CSU, and is not allowed by Title 5. Neither are A+, F+, and F–. Skyline’s math
folks were concerned that faculty couldn’t norm well enough to be clear on B vs B-, making it harder to have
uniformity within departments. We’re finding more common ground with Canada. Unlike Skyline, Canada is
participating with us in SoTL.
In the past, allocation of district funds among the three colleges favored CSM, which caused some resentment at
Skyline and Canada. The new allocation model does not favor CSM. In any case this allocation is not faculty
driven. Jeremy expressed concern that a CSM-led initiative for +/- grading could increase tension between
CSM and Skyline. He expects +/- grading would pass a district faculty vote by a very large margin. Eileen
asked that we look at the bigger issue, the relevance of instituting the policy. We support and believe in it.
Jeremy said he hopes the three colleges will find common ground.
Diana pointed out individual instructors can still grade without using plusses and minuses. On the question of
whether it would be worth postponing an all-faculty vote for a year, Jim said this has been up for discussion
long enough, and we believe this is the best way to serve students. Jeremy pointed out we are simply making a
recommendation to the Board of Trustees. Skyline faculty who are strongly opposed could take their arguments
to the Board. There is still a chance of more dialogue.
Dan reported Foothill/de Anza made a presentation on +/- grading at an ASCCC plenary session. Their data
showed student GPAs were minimally affected. The only group significantly affected was students with 4.0s.
There are now fewer of those, but more near-4.0s. Eric Raznick pointed out the district used plus/minus grading
15 years ago and could do so again. Consensus of Governing Council was to recommend Jeremy vote yes for a
vote of all district faculty on plus/minus grading.
NEW BUSINESS – EARLY ALERT SYSTEM Jeremy introduced Vice President for Student Services
Jennifer Hughes to discuss the early alert system. He expressed the concern that with a non-mandated early
alert system, students of non-users may conclude everything is OK with them. Jennifer distributed information
she and ITS Director Eric Raznick prepared about the system, and talked about what the system is, how it
works, and how can we can get greater use of it by faculty. Eric can answer questions about the technical end,
but early alert is not a techie process.
Early alert is an automated system to communicate with students in academic difficulty. It replaces the much
slower paper and pencil process in which faculty alerted Student Services, who contacted students. Many
faculty don’t use early alert because they intervene one-on-one with students, which is the best retention
strategy. Early alert is faculty driven. Instructors have asked Eric for an improved technological system.
We’ve done a great job with access, but need to do more on retention. Early alert strengthens matriculation,
3
especially in follow-up. A pilot project for English courses below English 100 in Spring 2007 went so well we
decided to turn it on for all CSM courses this fall. Utilization isn’t up to the level we’d hoped for.
Here’s how it works: WebSMART’s detailed class lists now have a column headed Alert, just after the student
ID number. The initial default is No. Clicking on the No changes it to Yes. After clicking the No for each
student you wish to alert, click on Apply Alert. On the early alert screen, select students one at a time, click the
appropriate buttons giving reasons for the alert (academic progress, attendance, quality of work, and homework)
and optionally use the box titled “instructor comments for counselor.” An email is sent to each student listing
their reasons, giving contact information for several campus resources, and asking the student to meet with the
instructor. An email is also sent to the counselor with the reasons and any instructor comments. The instructor
comments do not go to the student. Early Alert can be entered until the last day to withdraw from the course
(Nov. 20 for semester-length courses.) At present, early alerts cannot be removed or changed, and instructors
can’t use early alert to send a message directly to the student. These features might be addressed in the future.
Members also asked what is meant by “academic progress.”
Brandon pointed out not all students have email addresses. Foothill requires its students to have email. Their
counselors set up accounts for students if necessary. Jeremy said other institutions do the same. Eileen noted
instructors don’t know who counselors are for some students. Rosemary suggested giving every student an
smccd.edu email account. Jennifer pointed out 90% of our students have their own email. Other colleges have
much lower percentages. Students don’t always use their email accounts, and the rate of use is lower with
college accounts. We can still generate and mail hardcopy letters to students without email. ITS keeps track of
email addresses students provide with they register online, as about 80% of students do. Rosemary said for the
past five or six years she has required students have email accounts. Martin pointed out it is easy to link CSM
email accounts to other email accounts. Eileen asked about text messaging. Jennifer said students need email
to be waitlisted, and we are receptive to continuing to explore options. Diana suggested the Technology
Advisory Committee (TAC) revisit it. Jennifer suggested a presentation to Governing Council from Eric and
others on email accounts and other technology-related issues and processes.
Our counselors do not have case loads. Early alert email notifications go first to EOPS or DSPS coordinators if
appropriate. All others go first to Dean of Counseling Marsha Ramezane. Internal software shows which
counselor the student has been seeing, and the alert is forwarded to that counselor, who calls students on the
phone. At the counselor level, each college can do what it wants. It is not yet a workload issue because the
numbers are still fairly small. Some students have said instructor and counselor notification show people care.
To measure the success of early alert, we want to track students over time to determine whether intervention
affected long-term retention and success. We can now pull up any class, see who has been alerted and why, and
see their end-of-semester grades. Future enhancements might include 1) having a way to follow up whether
students notified by early alert came back to class. We can now follow up whether they visited counselors. 2)
having multiple alerts. 3) focusing on special populations, such as student athletes, international students, and
students who are parents. Faculty could be involved in the content of the letters sent to student.
Jennifer will take feedback to the matriculation group. The ease of the system means there is no need to set up a
workshop on how to use it. Eileen suggested sending reminders to faculty that early alert is available. Martin
Bednarek suggested linking those reminders to the last date to withdraw. Kathleen said she contacts students
anyway, but early alert gets more people involved and keeps records. There is good collaboration between
instruction and student services. Linda said one of her students who had never been above a D came back after
am early alert and got an A on a major test. Brandon pointed out not every student has a counselor. Marsha
Ramezane has to look at every alert, except those for EOPS and DSPS students, and funnel email to a counselor
for students who have one. Marsha herself phones students who have no counselor.
Matriculating students are required to have only an initial appointment with a counselor, not later appointments.
We need more students to utilize counseling services. Brandon suggested giving students an assignment to see a
counselor, say to get an educational plan, or to go to the career center to learn about careers related to their
interests. Students need to know what our counselors can provide beyond setting up student schedules and
4
calling students who are in academic trouble. Eileen said some students don’t know anything about major
requirements. Jennifer said learning communities with a counselor on the team help build a support network.
Martin said early alerts have benefited his international students on several occasions. Kathleen said English
instructors, who for example have lots of ESL students who end up in native English classes, would love to
work with counselors. Jennifer suggested starting a pilot program. Jeremy described us as a receptive audience
to early alert and to ideas for specific things we can do. He can write a letter asking for faculty participation.
There would be hesitation if the idea were to require all faculty to use early alert. Jennifer said it is best if use
and modifications are faculty-driven. Jeremy said he likes the integrative learning ideas, but students fail for
many reasons beyond laziness and lack of understanding. Feedback is important. This is a way to engage
students. Being called by a counselor shows students people care. Some students feel it’s too late. Early alert
turns some of them around. Jennifer asked faculty with suggestions on tweaking early alert to contact her.
NEW BUSINESS – COMPUTERIZED PREREQUISITE BLOCKING Jeremy reported administration
listened to faculty concerns and affected faculty have been given more time. Work similar to that done in
English and math needs to be done in and with other affected departments. He said it is a source of ongoing
frustration. Some instructors have done a lot of work only to run into brick walls that shouldn’t have existed.
Faculty didn’t get the word until October 19 that electronic blocking would not be implemented November 1.
Jeremy prefers DAS rather than the college senates take the lead on this. DAS seems willing to support our
position, and Canada was excited we did this. Some administrators who have worked on prerequisite blocking a
long time are irked. Skyline has said they hadn’t been consulted, though their math and English departments
had been. There is a misconception that working with some faculty means working with faculty at large. We
must work with everyone. There are hurdles moving forward.
Jeremy said there is nothing wrong with prerequisite checking for all courses. The problem is with blocking.
Equivalent courses can be dealt with by building an equivalency matrix, such as Math and English have done.
Courses can be added to these matrices. Challenges are harder. Students have to download a form and walk it
to campus, where it goes through a review process. Students challenging English courses have to produce
portfolios. English instructors have been paid to look at challenges, but that may end when checking is done
across the college. Jeremy suggested a popup form as an alternative to a printed form.
Prerequisite blocking is a senate issue. We have three autonomous institutions. Our curriculum is ours to
protect, and we must not get bullied into changes. Brandon said administration wants faculty available to read
challenges 12 months a year. Dan said Brandon brought this to his attention last week, and he is now working
with John Kirk on it. He will do the right thing but is collecting facts at this point. Our contract is for 175 days.
Jeremy said prerequisite and challenge requirements ought to be uniform across the district within departments,
but not from department to department. There needs to be meaningful dialogue within affected departments,
and they should work with Eric as English and math did. Kathleen said we should be involved in the wording of
blocking messages so they are student-friendly. Jeremy said he needs to meet with Jennifer and Susan and form
a task force to clarify prerequisites and distinguish prerequisites from recommended preparation. They want us
to come up with solutions in a timely manner. Linda told an anecdote about a student who was getting an F in
her Math 252 while taking 251 (the prerequisite for 252) concurrently. He had taken the wrong calculus
sequence at Skyline, and his counselor there said he could therefore take the first two courses in the right
sequence (251 and 252) concurrently. People not expert in the field can’t always recognize the needs of
students. Jeremy said instructors are needed in addressing such issues.
Governing Council had asked each affected department be allowed to opt in or opt out of prerequisite blocking,
but blocking was simply left turned off for everyone except current users, including English, ESL, reading, and
math. Some departments, like welding, were ready to use blocking. Jeremy said blocking is a 10+1 matter, and
we weren’t consulted. Members asked whether ITS could readily turn prerequisite blocking on for some
courses and off for others, and whether the system was fully ready to handle across the board blocking..
NEW BUSINESS – CONCURRENT ENROLLMENT UPDATE Jeremy distributed two documents: Jing
Luan’s “Enhancing High School-to-College Success” white paper for the District, and a statement from the
5
English department on why it does not support having high school teachers teach English courses on high
school campuses. Former DAS president Nick Kapp contributed to the first version of the white paper.
Members noted an inconsistency in its statistics (a table appeared twice in the paper, and headings on two of its
lines were switched), and the use of Middle College data to support continuing education within high schools.
Jeremy asked members to read the white paper so we can discuss it at a future meeting. Jeremy has learned
some colleges are utilizing high school faculty to teach college courses on high school campuses. The National
Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships (NACEP), which offers accreditation to concurrent enrollment
programs, is meeting in Salt Lake City this weekend. Concurrent enrollment is popular in Utah, to speed the
earning of degrees by Mormon women whose husbands are away on missions, and by the husbands after they
return.
Kathleen pointed out a problem with high school teachers teaching our English courses: they have no
composition training. Jeremy noted we do hire high school teachers as adjuncts, and we can offer our courses
off campus, including at high schools. Kathleen noted applicants with minimum quals aren’t necessarily hired.
Jeremy asked how we maintain standards. There are best practices that aren’t in the white paper. He asked
how, with high schools requiring four years of English, students could fit college English courses into their
schedules. Kathleen said some high school students, including her daughter, take two English classes some
semesters. Eileen noted the point in the white paper that the senior year in high school is often wasted. Why not
give seniors our tests so they can take basic courses while still in high school? Kathleen said they are being
tested on the high school curriculum, not on ours.
Jeremy said we should decide what seems reasonable to us. The advanced placement model is not the best
model for concurrent enrollment, and Chancellor Galatolo has taken it off the table He wants to increase
concurrent enrollment but wants us to come up with ideas for doing so. Jeremy said let’s explore programs to
meet needs. The solutions may not look like the proposals in the white paper. We do want to get more students
through the high school to college gap. Our document makes it sound like concurrent enrollment with high
school faculty teaching our courses is the only way. It isn’t the only way, it is definitely not the best, and it is
not a plan we would have come up with.
How do we get programs in place that work on high school to college transition that far too many California
learners fail to make? We want dialogue with high schools about the transition problem. Kathleen said the AP
program was for high achievers who wanted a step up at four year universities. We didn’t see them as potential
CSM students. Jeremy said high schools have been very resistant to involvement with us. There was a big
opening when the San Mateo Union High School District had labor problems and couldn’t meet payroll. It
came up with the idea the college district could pay for AP courses at the high schools and get the FTES.
Chancellor Galatolo saw that as an opening, but the program wasn’t viable.
Dan told of a woman whom he described as a poster child for the Chancellor’s version of concurrent enrollment.
She earned 60 units here and was admitted to Harvard, but Harvard accepted none of her 60 units. Eileen said
let’s also look at basic skills, and identify our priorities.
Dan said in the AP model, courses are listed twice on student transcripts, once as a high school course, again as
a college course. NACEP endorses this practice. High school students get to take community college courses
for free. We get the FTES. Jeremy said Chancellor Galatolo has acted responsibly. He saw an idea that would
make a lot of money. When we said it wouldn’t work, he listened. An account has been set up for DAS
president Patty Dilko to pay faculty who discuss concurrent enrollment courses with high school faculty, but no
high school faculty have been identified for this so no money has been used.
Jeremy said the AP model is dead. The controversy now is about qualified high school faculty teaching college
courses on their campuses. Kathleen distributed a statement from the English department giving its reasons for
opting out. An abbreviated version will appear in the Advocate. Diana said in her area, instructors want it to
happen, but are getting resistance from high school administrators. The high schools want the focus to be on
high school, not on the transition to college.
6
NEW BUSINESS – DISTRICT PUBLIC SAFETY POLICY Jeremy introduced the issue of the use of
security cameras on campus. This is a statewide recommendation. The U. S. Supreme Court has said
Americans have no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place. There is no intention to put them in
offices. There are security and safety issues. We’ve had computer projectors stolen three times from smart
classrooms. Cameras at campus entrances can capture license plate numbers of cars. Blue phones, which set off
an alarm when they are picked up, are going in along all routes. They have been successful as a deterrent to
crime at other schools.
Dan said another issue is the possibility of campus security officers carrying guns. This is a very contentious
issue at other community colleges. We have access to an armed strike team in case of a possible shooting
incident. Dan asked Jeremy to get clarification about the present policy and practice.
NEW BUSINESS – CODE OF ETHICS Jeremy said one of the ethics statements we have been considering
was adopted some years ago. Another, from the AAUP, focuses on academic freedom rather than on student
learning. Noting Kathleen’s assertion at our last meeting that the value of such statements is in the dialogue
about them, Jeremy said each constituency is working on its own code of professional ethics. District policy
will be a preamble weaving those together.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 4:18 pm. The next meeting will be Nov. 13, 2007.