District Ed Committee 12/11/2015
Agenda review: moved to accept – Joseph 1st, Carlos second – modification – Dr. Webb will
present PASS report. Approved
November minutes: change to page 1 item four – Lisa. S/B DEC has not received…not Lasana,
Linda made other adjustments on her copy of the minutes. She will make corrections and post
later today. Motion as amended made by Bill, Calvin second. Approved – one abstention.
Linda – acknowledged Carlos McClean’s retirement. Will possibly be back in the spring
because of the strs rules.
Multiple Measures: Nathan Pellegrin will present. Project has data from internal & external.
External – feeder districts – Oakland, Alameda, ? and others in the works. Interest in getting
other school districts involved. Rebecca Koche – CPT MOUs with all partnering institutions.
All feeder districts – will be able to access h.s. transcripts and make placement assignments
automatically. Will boost enrollment and increase likelihood of them going to college.
Placement has been a problem due to assessment as being placed too low. Bill – what
mechanism guarantees that the placement is less color/economically fair? Nathan doing a
disproportionate study to assess success. Mike add – data from the Promise pathways in Long
Beach that this has been successful so before implementing they looked at the data from other
institutions doing this. January flex day – John Hecks gave a detailed talk in which he showed
the data – 4 times the students putting in basic skills – such students didn’t do as well on
standardized testing. Bill – antidotal. Mike – observational study – not antidotal – numerous
legitimate statistics on studies of multiple measures placements. Bill – issue same as PASS
money was not spent the ways we said we would. Nathan – supports this because validation of
the study will happen. Mario – dec subcommittee to work on the disproportionate impact study.
Nathan – invited faculty and students to come and give input. They got good feedback. They
are validating and getting input. Mario – be careful and concerned – need to follow up on this.
Wants to work with Nathan – will include Mario and he can report back. Opportunity for
inclusion – we should have faculty senate in the conversation. Mike on the IR website you’ll
find achievement gap – four reports – one is disproportionate impact report done last May.
Please read as a starter to get up to speed. Also on website – data for MM data – Heck’s
presentation is there. Research data nationwide. External agreements are in place. Oakland &
Alameda is being used for spring 2016 placement. Counselors who are meeting with students in
those districts are using that data and incorporating into placement process. Making more plans
on the automation to get the data where it needs to be in our system for use. There a significant
amount of work to be done to be automated. We cannot rely on people here and at the districts
to automate this information. Files need to fit a data scheme. Transcript data &
recommendations need to be in PS. It’s not clear how to do this. Cleavon – UC uses some type
of automated analysis and suggested Nathan look at that. May be something we can match. He
will get the specific information on the office at UC and will forward data. Code in SARS the
counselors are using to place students with multiple measures (MM). Tram stated that UC
couldn’t get all of the transcripts analyzed – they contact schools to let them know what classes
students still need to be able to finish A-G. UC Office of the President. Adela – can we use this
to analyze students in concurrent enrollment to determine what has been met and has to be met?
Lisa – this is a piece of MM, right? Yes. How do counselors do a determination on the grades?
Nathan – that’s where the code is put in SARS to make placement determination. Nathan – how
do we communicate & how do we collect data? Ann has used it a few times but she has to
remember to use it while preparing online ed plans with a short period of time with the student.
Students will be placed higher than on assessment only. So many things going on in counseling
that it gets labor intensive. Adela also looking at another model where the student does their
own determination so they can advocate for themselves. Mike made an information presentation
showing how to get the MM talk from John Heck. Also shown on the website is data collected.
Achievement gap – disproportionate impact study. Karen has been meeting with faculty for a
year on MM – not just starting – huge amount of work has been put into this. Bill – student
placement – should be more generally available than just flex day. S/B regularly repeated.
District-wide enrollment campaign – a lot of input from many sources. This is the final plan.
These will be on billboards, busses, bus shelters. Showed the posters, etc. Produced tv
commercial in house. Shown on Comcast cable & on PCCD tv & social media. Streets &
airways right after Christmas. Lisa – why after Xmas. Couldn’t get the budget together for this $50K campaign. Early enrollment – emailed students who had applied thru cccapply but didn’t
enroll. Sent out just prior to early enrollment. Ann – when these are going up & down? January
1- end of January. Ann – don’t see any Asian students & there are a lot of Asian students – need
to see Chinese people. Jeff – impossible to get every ethnicities. Tram got one of the letters
since she started at BCC she applied. Might want to refine it a bit to what students need to do
first – go to this place and contact this person. Bill – money – we hear we don’t have any.
Measure B hasn’t been used so there should be some $ to spend on this type of thing. PI budget
has been cut 74% since ?? Other districts are spending a lot of money. Arnulfo – is there a
methodology on what the response we’ve gotten from the letters. Jeff – no real methodology –
colleges crafted their own letters. 14,000 letters went out. Jeff – will work with Adela to see if
they can determine how many have actually enrolled. James – given the capacity of our
colleges, how much are we using to process and serve these students – we need to be effective in
capturing these students by enrolling them. Comprehensive approach that ensures our colleges
are staffed to intake these students. Comprehensive planning – when they show up we need to
service them.
Lasana Hotep – Centers for your educational success: had a powerpoint
Basics – Office of student success & equity – how do we work at the four colleges to have an
umbrella that equity can serve at the campuses. Old equity plans were led by faculty,
administrators, etc. Want to recommend that there is one office. Community based organization
relationships – outreach efforts – Karen & Lasana – questions like where can they send groups of
students. They want to work with the colleges in groups. To respond to people who want to do
business with our colleges. Put up presentation Meeting with presidents, superintendents, chancellor, faculty – Our Chancellor stood up and told
all of these people that they would work with Lasana. He wants to work with the campuses to
coordinate equity across the district. Presidents want an acronym – Center for your educational
success (C-YES). Report sent to the presidents asking for them to designate the person on
campus to get centers up and running in the spring. Train staff on how we run these centers. He
is preparing job descriptions on the campus positions. Ann – counseling piece – will the
counselor be paid by the district? Counselor will be at the campus. Each campus will have their
own office to handle these target populations. Cleavon – can the applications for Trio, etc, be
done at the campuses. We will be able to see which students will be eligible but are not able to
be placed in programs because of the size of the programs. Carlos – concerns – look at this plan
but where are the common services that will be handled on each center. Where realistically will
we be able to put these people – don’t see how we can implement without additional resources
and space. If we say we are talking to administrators but when it comes to doing the work it’s
going to be faculty and administrators. Lasana – when he works with folks he says you have an
issue with space and with other efforts, but when 1200 students want to come to the college how
will we respond. How will our campuses respond without a center? What are the services we
are trying to provide and how will we provide them. People are coming in as groups – the way
we’ve been handling, the community groups are not satisfied with our services. We want to
show our partners that we are responding and doing it well. Carlos – if we don’t have the
staffing to handle the extra students. Don’t see a realistic plan. Mario – Center sounds like the
welcome center – you could do it in the welcome center. Agrees with Carlos more planning
needs to be done. Community antidotal feedback but not real feedback. See the programs
should be done in the tutorial/assessment centers. We get a lot of people generating a lot of ideas
but we don’t coordinate the plans well. More equity research at the district – what are the big
issues at the colleges and how they are addressing the issues. Lasana – planning with whom?
Mario – academic senate – the four colleges. Take people from the equity committees. Integrate
the colleges in a powerful way. Doris – funding by equity? Equity, measure B & CPT. Will
programs be overlapping? He thinks coordination should be at the college. Need to coordinate,
plan, strategize. Karen – colleges need to own this up and down the food chain. Maybe this
committee should set a date on how the campuses will roll out their plans so we need to hold
each of the campuses accountable. Cleavon – our institutional structures may compromise our
plans. What do we need to do to organize and/or operationalize at the campuses. Talk less about
the plan and how will we assess ourselves. We need to focus on owning our structure and how
we will improve our “imperfect” plans. Lilia – may want to have some services at the high
schools. Going to some h.s. doing workshops on cccapply, financial aid and other programs. As
many services as we can at the high schools. Lisa – if we are having districtwide coordination
there are issues with the district that are hindering the colleges from implementing our plans.
The district level should have initiatives to assist populations – she isn’t seeing this at the district
level. Hoping they can provide coordination. The centers would house adult ed & foster youth.
Lisa – campus level – it’s one thing to take the college equity plans and input the district stuff
into the plans. Each college has a timeline of when things are going to happen. Colleges are
space poor. Wants the colleges to present plans. Mike – stress importance of planning and
planning but we really need to start this program. Cleavon also said we need to assess what we
are doing once they get going. Mike has been at some of the college meetings. Mario – wants
written proposal/plan that goes out to the colleges that can be evaluated by the equity committees
at the colleges and respond to. Lasana – go with Karen’s recommendation to respond how they
will be responsive to the call from the community based organizations and schools and how the
colleges will customize their plans. Tram – assessment piece – we’d like to pilot the Sierra
college plan. Need people who will fulfill these positions so they can begin to train.
Tram motion colleges will get a written district plan with parameters and tool kit to indicate the
creation a proposal how we will implement the plans. To have colleges bring back proposals to
address equity office plan implementation by the February DEC date. All sources of funding.
Lisa seconded. Cleavon – 2 points – toolkit – Cleavon will give me the wording of the motion.
Bill – presidents already know what they want to do. Our kids suffer when we b.s. talking over
how to spend the money. In favor – everyone with one abstention.
Motion wording from Cleavon:


District provide to the colleges an implementation toolkit for Centers for Your
Educational Success (C-YES) noting all of the different funding sources for the centers
College presidents bring to the February DEC meeting their timelines for
implementing/integrating C-YES at the colleges.
Laney PASS report: Webb – college received opportunity to use a level of funding to suppor the
students at the college. Addressing disproportionate students who are not doing as well as they
should given their resources. Received 17 plans. $868K to support programs. At the end of the
year only $261 spent – her responsibility. In the course of their mobilizing their level of funding
changed. By February 2015 they were proposing positions to fill staff & faculty. They were told
the funding was no longer for many years, but for one year. The positions where there were no
positions they went forward. Some funds ASB, Career Services asked for $? For positions but
couldn’t hire so they had to go back and determine how to spend. Look on page 10 of the report
where it shows how the money was spent. During spring advocated more ft faculty positions –
they were focused on getting faculty on board also focused on accreditation. They requested the
funding be carried over. We all received the carryover funds. Were received in November & all
are allocated on page 11 is the list. Most of the same initiatives and some are different. Eric
asked for this report in August. She didn’t do it because she had too much shit to do. Faculty
senate requested a report however she had too many demands – bla blab la – late again.
Questions: Mario – in executive summary that the district ??? couldn’t catch what he said.
Wants to know how student success was improved – we need to be disciplined about assessing
how we used the money and how the data shows there was improvement. No answer from
Webbie. Bill – money is appropriate for those who are suffering and for whatever reason the
money isn’t spent – the people who suffer “look like him”. We have so much money we can’t
spend it. There’s no indication of how the lives of black, Hispanic, other males were improved.
We spent $4M and we don’t know if any students are better off than before we spent the money.
Adela – college understood the money would be for multiple years but when looking at
allocations – Puente was allocated $50K but nothing was spent. Webb said they fell down on the
job and didn’t spend it. Webb – finally researcher on campus and is to finish the research on the
progress of these programs. Adela – don’t need a researcher to see that these things didn’t
happen. Webb – don’t know the effect & respects feedback. Lilia – with what happened with
the PASS funding and the opportunity, she wants to concur with Webb that we need to have the
resources to implement and spend funding. Money came in and people were doing their work
and we asked them to come up with an idea or initiative and do it. When you do a grant, you
have to build in who’s going to the work and the budget. In this case, we had the money but not
the personnel resources to do the work – one of the biggest challenges. Cleavon – less about the
resources but there was not a lack of people who wants to do the work – disagrees with her. It’s
less about the resources and more about the institutional structures and will to do the work. We
will not make progress if we do not address this. Webb – systems, structures, time – have to get
people in place for accountability. She agrees…with Cleavon & Bill – we do have a lot of
resources but we have to stop the “treadmill” and have to deal with our broken systems and make
the change. Bill – would like to make sure that we have failed to do this; it had nothing to do
with the students involved. Intelligence testing – always about what the systems lacked. We
need to show that it was a breakdown with the administration. Mario – there’s carryover so we
need to have reports from the colleges to give an update – what the money is for and how it is
improving the lives of students. Lisa – involved in trying to implement and review the PASS
proposals – very small group of programs. In the report there is a list of new projects but she is
not aware how these new projects have been chosen. The planning for the umoja program is in
the equity plan. Disappointed because the $ was for assisting students with achievement gaps
she doesn’t see how the process worked. Webb – as was requested of the president by IEC – she
made those decisions based on the needs of AA & Latino males. Details of the process will be
put in writing but she made the decisions. Lisa – she was there and there is a change – they
ranked the proposals last year but the “next steps” part does not match up. Webb – need to have
a “robust” conversation with the faculty senate.
CPT grant & AB86 Adult ed regional planning update: Karen Engle – gave a presentation.
Adela – who is leading design teams? Karen – VPIs are working with the design teams & faculty
will be working on them for stipends but will be asked what they will do. Adela wants to know
how her office will fit into this – how will students register and what about non-credit
certificates. Tram – need a design team that is separate. Adela – we’ll have the work come with
no one to do it. Curriculum specialists will be involved. Lisa – CIPD passed the Merritt
pathways certificates and will go to the state in January so it will be offered in the fall. We are
all offering non-credit classes – so the union may want to be involved – how are the faculty be
paid. Tram – we should focus on curriculum on cdcp courses. Lisa – need to figure out how a
district wide design team for implementing. As a district we cannot go lower but we can go
higher – many conversations need to be had. Tram – difference is in the manual. At Merritt it’s
close to cte courses but depends on area. Karen – in January we need to set up a systems design
team to tackle the faculty compensation, facilities, etc. Bill – if mqs are the same as in the past
there is no compensation issue. What are the standards because they change with who we are
dealing with? Lilia – agree to have design teams but we can’t forget about students – they need
to know the consequences of taking these classes. Clear if taking a non-credit class how they
will be treated differently – for instance will they get finaid for these? Non-credit is a pathways
and there are sequence of courses leading to credit courses. Lisa, the only one that is going to be
offered this fall is at Merritt because it has to be sent to the state for approval. Hermie – don’t
forget about the non-credit SSSP mandates. We have to align with the non-credit SSSP. Next
step – work with adult ed to design the program. Hosted a community meeting with those who
participated in programs last year but they were not happy – worried about equity at the
campuses. Youth employment agency was one of the organizations. They want to engage in our
equity conversations. SF Foundation has offered space in downtown Oakland to have meetings
with community organizations. Could lead to a more transparent exchange of ideas. Lisa –
discussed in equity plan – they don’t want to wait for us to build anything they already have. We
don’t need to offer workshops that they already offer. How can we bridge their programs with
ours to help students? Cleavon – consider cte program advisories – but maybe we need to build
in community advisors on our curriculum on our campuses so we are providing what is needed
by the community. Bill – how will we do it and have someone to do it? Key here – impression
is that when someone goes to the presidents & chancellor with ways to spend the equity dollars
and if they don’t agree with it they say no. It’s our money, not the presidents’ money. They
don’t read anything until it’s formalized then they complain. Lisa – that’s why you need to read
the equity plan and give input. There’s a place for faculty to give input. It’s in the 10 + 1 and
our right and responsibility to give input. Bill – different response when presidents have to sign
something they’ve already committed to. Karen – Oakland mayor’s office (and other
organizations) and creating an “Oakland Promise.” Asking us to do major tasks – look at her last
slide – improving college readiness seamless transitions, financial support, persistence supports.
Public launch on January 28 at Oakland H.S. the mayor is launching this program.