District Education Committee
MINUTES of the
District Education Committee Meeting
October 18, 2012 9:00 - Noon
Committee: District Education Committee
Attendance: Diana Bajrami, Joseph Bielanski, Anita Black, Debbie Budd, Brian Cervantes, May Chen, Steven Cohen, Lisa Cook, Matthew Goldstein, Duncan
Graham, Eric Gravenberg, Jenny Lowood, Bill Love, Marco Menendez, Alexis Montevirgen, Mike Orkin, Tae-Soon Park, David Reed, Denise Richardson, Stacy
Thompson, Trulie Thompson, Karolyn van Putten, Dera Williams
Co-Chairs:
Mike Orkin, Denise Richardson
Facilitator:
Stacy Thompson
Recorder:
Lisa Cook
Note Taker: Laura Leon-Maurice
Guests:
None
Absent:
Paula Armstead, Linda Berry, Paula Coil, Bob Grill, Evelyn Lord, Carlos McLean, Cleavon Smith,
DECISIONS
Agenda Item
Discussion
Meeting Called to Order –
Mike Orkin
I. Welcome and IntroductionsMike Orkin
Meeting began at 9:05
II. Online Student
Evaluation: Tenured and
Part-Time FacultyFabian Banga
Now it is now possible to do student evaluations on-line. This does not apply to tenured
Encourage
track faculty. At BCC we started to do this online. If the instructor is teaching a face to
members to use
face class, the evaluation is done in the class. We used the exact replication of the
MOOC
evaluation in Moodle. Moodle is an accessible system. Any student at PCCD can access
Moodle. MMenendez- Fabulous work. My concern is a having a captive audience. I would
suggest taking them to a computer lab, so we get a decent amount of response. MOrkinOnline instructors have to do this. We are talking about all classes doing this. No
requirement to do this, it is option. This is the direction that things are going. FBangaStudents could do it on their phones or their laptops in the class. MMenendez - The
incentive is getting faster results, they can complete the evaluation process faster. I like
that there is still a paper option. MOrkin- Even with paper evaluations response rate is low.
This allows a way where students can be contacted by email.
Follow-up
Action
We have a Dropbox for this committee. It is a place to drop all of the documents to
distribute to this committee. Everything is also posted to the DEC website. Review
minutes of last meeting. Marco moves to approve. Matt seconds.
(Shared
Agreement
/Resolved or
Unresolved?)
Minutes
approved.
Agenda Item
III. Massive Online Open
CoursesFabian Banga
IV. Peralta Student Success
Task Force (PSSTF)Eric Gravenberg
V. Repeatability Update
Family of Courses-
Discussion
Follow-up
Action
DECISION
S
(Shared
Agreement
/Resolved or
Unresolved?)
FBanga- Open resources philosophy is that the class should be open not closed. MOrkinMOOC-started last year in Canada. One of the reasons that I asked Fabian to do this
presentation right now is because the states chancellor’s office is encouraging the possible
use of MOOCs. Try offering a MOOC type course in basic skills, not as a credit course.
This is something that we should have on our radar. Fabian has applied to one of these
gates grants. FBanga- The idea is not a new one. The movement is about sharing a class
with everyone. Moodle is an example of an open source.
EGravenberg- When you have a lot of new initiatives in the district sometimes they can
get off center. That was happening at the SSTF. We decided to limit the major work. We
felt we needed to move quickly. One of the things we decided to do was have each campus
look at the model and make sure it works for their committees. The plans from that model
will be looked at their own campuses and adjust it for them. We will be ahead of the
mandate from the state to implement by 2014; we should have it by 2013. We still have
some issues but the task force is moving forward. SThompson- How is the information at
SSTF getting back to the colleges? EGravenberg- Laney is piloting online orientation and
they are doing a presentation at the next PSST meeting. ABlack- Two of the workshops
that I sat in presented on what they were doing. They were gathering data on the success of
the program. Aspect of the institutionalization of it. What they used to used to get the
students to enroll, is zero unit classes that got them engaged. So it effectively paid for
itself, because we do get reimbursement for the zero unit classes. They used technology to
gain immediate information in some of the classes. The projected questions on the screen
and the students responded with clickers and getting immediate information. TThompsonPart of the incentive if you want to get the classes that you want, is you will be required to
do orientation. EGravenberg- Don’t rush too quickly into online orientation. What is the
right balance? We need both, one cannot supplant the other. MOrkin- It is part of state
requirement that any activity offered to students face to face have to be offered online.
DRichardson- There are legitimate concerns that how it might leave students behind
particularly the most vulnerable students. A big concern that we need to address as we are
implementing. BLove– We never talked about resources. Assuming all of the stars alien,
will have money that we are not presently spending. Have we set aside some money for
this model?
Handouts were distributed. ABlack- We did share our thoughts but we didn’t come to any
conclusion about the last agenda item for student success. Is the college willing to take
Handouts in
Dropbox and on
2
Agenda Item
Discussion
Joseph Bielanski
something on their own without confirmation from PSSTF? We are not waiting to do stuff
at our colleges. JBielanski- We can provide a report about course repeatability issues. The
state has been changing what students are taking and what students can repeat. With
reduced funding they began to look at course repeatability. We need to get prepared and
get something in place to deal with that. What is changing is active participary course, in
the past you could take those 4 times, now you can only take them once. You can create
families but in those families you can only take 4 courses total. P.E. and athletics are not
the same. Even the athletics have a certain restrictions about how many hours.
MMenendez- If a student wanted to do beginning twice That is not allowed. No course is
repeatable. Even if a student wanted to repeat, there is not option to repeat. BCervantes- Is
there an option for lifelong learners? Joseph Bielanski- No. That was done by the state.
They are asking faculty to be conservative in how you create the families. SThompsonEach of the courses have to have a different outline and content.
VI. Student Success
Conference UpdateKarolyn van Putten, Anita
Black, Jennifer Lowood, Lisa
Cook, Cleavon Smith
All that attended felt that is was worthwhile and came back energized. KvanPutten Joseph asked if people would report on the ACCJC pieces. There is a Wickie space. I will
post the information after the 19 and let people know when they will be posted. There is a
new self-evaluation handbook, available on ACCJC website. Pick the things that are most
useful to you. ABlack- Gavalin College was the guinnea pig college for the outcomes
report. How much of the data is going to be important for that report? Solidify using the
Task Stream information. SThompson- We decided to try to launch an assessment and do
a little branding. If we can bring the students to bring their syllabi that shows their SLO’s,
maybe give them a slice of pizza. Something to get students motivated. JLowood- Lisa and
I were on a panel together. We got good responses. LCook- We talked about how change
is possible and we talked about our stories of change. Movement in Peralta to examine that
and ESL trying to develop a new model. We are looking at redesigning programs with the
new ideas JLowood- The theme was don’t just do assessment to do assessment, make
changes. Use it to become truly data driven. Gavalin talked about what they have done.
53%, not 100%. Making it meaningful and using that to make real changes. LCook- LA
Trade tack using non-credited orientation. Orientation is not just hard skills, model for
working with students to change their mind set and change their ways of being in college.
ABlack- LA Trade Tech model was exciting, was not a high cost model, it was a teaching
model. The students coming in where not ready to deal with what was hand. They took the
time to prepare for those classes and that program. KvanPutten- Saying it all in “250
Follow-up
Action
DECISION
S
(Shared
Agreement
/Resolved or
Unresolved?)
website.
3
Agenda Item
VII. SLO’s/Assessments,
Board of Trustees
Presentation-Mike Orkin
Discussion
words or less” maintains connections about outcomes and planning. We are writing to the
standards not the rubric. Administrative outcomes are not in the standards. DBudd- Over
the past several years we’ve highlighted our own. We have a lot of experts in our own
midst. I was proud, we are doing excellent work.
MOrkin- At the Oct. 9 meeting Diana did a presentation SLO assessment progress at
Peralta based on reports that were provided at the colleges. Diana is going to present at our
November meeting. I put in the Dropbox the presentation report that was given. Board
members 3 questions: 1. Bill Withrow- “If the ACCJC were to come to Peralta today and
analyze progress and activities, what grade do you thing they would give us?” Diana said
A plus. This is a question that he will ask again. We should be prepared and discuss a
response to this. 2. Nicky Gonzalez- “With all of the efforts done statewide to develop
SLO’s and easements at the 3 levels, has anyone tried to estimate the cost in terms of
hours put in developing this structure? How much is it really costing us?” That question is
something we should discuss. Similar issues have come up, PFT there is a cost involved
and they should be paid for it. 3. Abel Guillen- “How do you measure whether the
benefits? How can you develop analysis that will compare students who are benefiting
with students we are not?” KvanPutten- With respect to the grade issue is that the ACCJC
will not be giving us a grade it will be pass/fail. JLowood- Let me address the question
about the grade because it bares with it certain assumptions. That there is an endpoint that
is not what assessments is about, it is a continuous improvement. BLove- Resources, my
concern is that we are getting less money from the state and the ACCJC is asking for
additional information. If we did not have classified staff, a lot of this would not get done.
MGoldstein- Fundability it makes sense to ask how many hours do they work. This is
adding to the workload of faculty. There is a small group of faculty that does the heavy
lifting. If people were compensated fairly we would have more participation. KvanPuttenAt Laney the coordinator is not paid for doing additional work; they have a released time
assignment. MGoldstein- Time is money. DRichardson- Talking about the classified role
in accreditation. We need to hear more how you are dealing with reduced staffing. Let’s
put that on the agenda for the next meeting. JLowood- One of the things that we talked
about was the importance of bringing part time faculty into the meetings. You cannot ask
part time faculty to do this kind of work without paying them. MOrkin- The numbers were
an apples and oranges thing. She wanted to update that and have more information for the
next meeting. MOrkin- The numbers aren’t wrong, it is that all the information wasn’t in.
It will be on agenda next time. One person from each college is doing a report, instead of
Follow-up
Action
DECISION
S
(Shared
Agreement
/Resolved or
Unresolved?)
Agenda Items
for November- SLO
Assessment
Progress
-Doing more
with less
staffing.
4
Agenda Item
Discussion
Follow-up
Action
DECISION
S
(Shared
Agreement
/Resolved or
Unresolved?)
one person doing all of the colleges. The next time the board asked for SLO assessment
progress, the assessment coordinator present from each college.
VIII. Future Items
KvanPutten- I suggest that we add addressing a review of a draft of recommendation 5 as
a future agenda item, for misinformation. Rec. 5 is done by the colleges separately.
MOrkin-The current timeline calls for the college counsels looking at their drafts in
December draft version will be provided to committee. Presentation as an informational
item to PBC at their first meeting in January. It is not scheduled to be presented to the
DEC. I can bring it up to also provide to DEC as a presentation. DRichardson- I suggest
talking about classified role in accreditation on agenda for next meeting. BLove- We have
an item on the agenda talking about resources for some of these issues that we historically
push under the rug. We need to make the board and PBC those resources need to be shared
for something other than adding classes.
November
Agenda Item:
-Review of a
draft of
recommendation
5
-Classified role
in accreditation
Next Meeting – November 16, 2012
5