Strategic Goal #3 Minutes
12/7/2009, Revised 1/4/2010
Meeting was called to order by Gloria Hines at 9:10 a.m.
Members present included: Anthony Jansen, Liza Schellpfeffer, Bill White, Tom Lopez,
Renee Simpson, Jenelle Connor, Amy Bosley, and Gloria Hines (chair)
The members of the committed shared their rationale for being a part of this particular
goal. They each had a desire to:
 Develop the whole person
 Pass knowledge on to colleagues
 Communicate with each other
 Collaboration with each other
Thoughts and measurements – Amy Bosley
Amy share that we are expected to review what is current going on at the college regarding this
particular strategy, and determine what we need to do over the course of next few years. We are
charged with defining what we can do and how we might achieve the established goal. We will
also need to determine how we will know that we will have achieved the goal.
Amy also stress that the plan needs to be designed/developed for us (Valencia). She shared that
we need to lower the stakes so that people are comfortable and do not feel threatened. We need
to set number limits and targets but let people know that if they are not achieved there is no
negative consequence that will result from not meeting the goal.
Gloria asked that Renee send out the information related to member roles and responsibilities
and the principles we discussed at the initial meeting. Gloria also asked if everyone was ok with
the minutes. She reiterated: while one of our principles is open communication, there are some
conversations that should remain in the room.
We were asked to read the Strategic Issues and identify the issues that could support the goal.
o Gloria identified strategic issues #7, #9, and #13
o Renee identified strategic issues #10, #11, #12, and #13
o Bill asked for a better understanding of the governance model as a mean of
clarifying our objective. He also discussed defining what the word collaboration
means in the context of our daily work. What happens in a collaborative
environment and how do we know it‘s working? It was concluded that it is a
form of communication.
o Jenelle indicated she thought part of our charge was to help make staff feel they
are a part of the decision making process.
o Lisa indicated that mentoring could be used as an option for faculty and staff.
o Amy asked “What are the critical pieces of information that everyone needs to
know about Valencia. Identify the 5 most critical items and teach those to every
employee.
There was some discussion about clearly articulating the roles of FT Faculty members vs.
adjuncts vs. 4 month and 8 month faculty. The question was raised “What is the % of adjunct
teaching at Valencia?” It was noted that learning the career plans for adjunct faculty may prove
to be useful in determining commitment to special projects and initiatives.
Jenelle referenced using the annual performance evaluation as another means of identifying
faculty and staff commitment and willingness to participate in special projects and or initiatives
of the college.
The committee indicated there are a number of Barrier to Collaboration. There was some
discussion about a cast system and we need to find a common identity similar to Disney. Disney
refers to all employees as cast members. Another barriers identified was titles.
The following are action items that may be explored to eliminate some of the barriers:
 Employee Orientation – new & existing employees would be retooled with information
that would make titles less significant. It would level the playing field.
 Review governance through a formal evaluation process.
 Use focus groups to help define or review the concept of shared governance.
 Define way to deliver important information to faculty and staff
 Use Competencies for the Employees as a basis for sharing important information such
as:
o 4 strategic goal
o Core competencies
o Learning centered
o Ongoing information about the college
 Create something like ACIREMA – employees would have to experience what must
do/go through to attend Valencia. Allows staff to experience all the challenges and road
blocks.
 Develop Survey – before and after to see what is known about the college and the
programs, and initiatives that are going on within the college.
 When reviewing measurements consider move needle two or three percent over the
course of the next few years
 Look into a program review of shared governance – measure and redesign.
 Can we identify individuals for the work we are proposing based on the interests that
would be connected to an annual evaluation or an HR application?
 Look into how the concept of “you can’t not know” can be applied to faculty and staff
becoming more aware of and engaged in things happening at the college.
Here is our premise: Ultimately, everyone needs to know about collaboration and shared
governance. We also believe it is part of ongoing information about the college. Since we are
not currently doing anything that would help us know that we are making progress with this
strategic goal we are proposing the following initial steps:
A) Measure the following:
a. Knowledge of collaboration
b. Knowledge of shared governance
c. The level or extent to which shared governance is used.
B) Define what is classified as ongoing information about the college
C) Identify the number of part time faculty that teach as well as staff
D) Create ongoing educational training for everyone
E) Break down Barriers that identify/misidentify individuals with titles
F) Create an internal Marketing Deployment of information
Recognize there are people who are not naturally drawn to students and there are others who
wish to teach and not interact with the college environment.
There was a request from Gloria to have Seekers to go out and find others who can contribute to
this goal.
Tom will send e-mail on PT staff.
The following comments made by Margaret Gonzalez arrived on January 4, 2010 and are being
added to the minutes for inclusion, clarity and further discussion.
I did want to weigh in on the minutes that were sent. Let me qualify my comments by stating that I
realize that it is difficult to try and re-construct what evidently was a lengthy discussion (I know, I know...
I should have been there) but I do have some questions (my membership role/responsibility) and
some observations.
A. As Amy stated, "we are charged with defining what we can do and how we might achieve the
established goal." Correct me if I am wrong here, but I am assuming that our goal is to find ways that
we can invest in each other through the "use of collaborative approaches, and through regular review
and evolution of our shared governance system." Am I understanding this corrrectly?
B. As for the Strategic Issues, in addition to nos 7,9,10,11,12,and 13 I see #14 as having an impact on
our ability to affect collaboration and shared governance. When funds are not available for
certain projects/programs isn't it up to us to find other creative ways to implement ideas?
Can't we find ways to tap in to the talent that we have all around us?
C. Amy also asked us to "identify the 5 most critical items and teach those to every employee." I don't
know if a list was created during the meeting, but I would like to add (if it isn't there already) that
EVERY Valencia employee - from pruner to president - needs to understand that EVERY
employee performs a valued service to the college. I don't think that this is "automatically"
understood by everyone who works at Valencia.
D. I totally agree about "clearly articulating the roles of FT Faculty members vs adjuncts vs 4 month and
8 month faculty," especially in "determining commitment to special projects and initiatives." For years as
an adjunct, I did not want to "overstep my bounds" by getting involved in areas which were not
[perceived] as being allowed. Have we ever surveyed strictly adjuncts, 4 & 8 month'ers to find
out how they feel about a given set of issues? or would this just serve to perpetuate the
caste system......
E. Janelle suggested ""using the performance evaluation as a means of identifying faculty and staff
commitment and willingness to participate in special projects." Oh boy! This is probably a
conversation that, as Gloria, cautioned, should remain in the room. I was on the task force to
revamp the last evaluation form. We worked for over a year, and the results left much to be desired
(and the final product is STILL not in use). I wonder if there is a way to go back to Michael Shugg
and revise the revision?
F. Overall, I agree with Bill, that we need to make sure that we, as a team, need to make sure that
we share a common understanding of the terms we are trying to define: shared
governance/governance model; our objective; collaboration (isn't collaboration more than
just communication?)
I wish I could have been there. Have you decided on the next meeting date? Other than
identifying the 5 most critical items, was there anything else we should be prepared to share
during the next meeting?
Again, Happy New Year to all of you.
Membership Roles and Responsibilities
Convener – Gloria Hines – Schedules goal team meetings with members; prepares the
agendas for the meetings, and works with College Planning Council staff for assistance
with room reservations.
Recorder – Renee Simpson – Records minutes of meeting and distributes to group and
CPC staff.
Reporter – Jenelle Conner – Reports group progress, findings, etc. to CPC as needed.
Seekers – Anthony Jansen, Michele McArdle, Bill White, Jenelle Conner, and Gloria
Hines – Actively seek information to answer group questions or needs.
Questioners – Bill White, Anthony Jansen, Liza Schellpfeffer, Margaret Gonzalez –
Encourages the group to explore multiple scenarios and ideas when addressing date sets
and assumptions.
Principles Monitor – Tom Lopez and Wendi Dew – Monitors the group’s adherence to
design principles and helps the group through tough conversations by focusing on
principles.
Membership Group Principles: (Agreed Upon 11-/10/2009)
Everyone’s voice on the team is valued and important. All perspectives are welcomed, both
form those who are closest to the work as well as those who observe it from a distance.
The teams will first address the work to be done to meet the goal, without concern for the
measurement.
After identifying the work to be done towards each goal, the teams will recommend what should
be measured to determine if we are making progress.
All ideas pertaining to the topic should be addressed. No topic is too big or too small.
Reach out to other voices.
Look at what is being done before we encounter what needs to be done.
Use the information from Foundations of Excellence.
Open Communication (No Hidden Agendas)
Think beyond our own roles and consider the needs of others.
Be on time; be present, committed and invested in the work. Be an active participant
It is OK to disagree, but be respectful.
Agree to be accountable for the things we propose.