Faculty Senate Minutes
Thursday, November 1, 2007
3:15 PM to 5:00 PM, Chesapeake 105
1. Attendance: Please check-in on the attendance roster.
2. Review the Agenda for the 11/1/07 meeting.
The agenda was accepted.
3. Review the Minutes of the 10/18/07 meeting.
Mark Hubley reported that he had not completed a draft of the 10/18 minutes. He would distribute the
draft electronically for approval.
4. Calendar
Hubley said he would not be able to attend the Board of Trustees meeting on the 8th of November. He
would enter a report into the record.
Hubley asked if the CWF was scheduled to meet on December 19th. The reply was “no.” Winter break
starts on December 22nd. The Faculty Senate could meet on the 20th, but Hubley was not planning to
hold a meeting on that day.
Fall 2007 important dates
A. College closed or no classes
i) College Enrichment Day, no classes, Tue. 10/30
ii) Thanksgiving Break, no classes, Wed. 11/21
iii) Thanksgiving Break, college closed, Thu. 11/22—Sun. 11/25
iv) Winter Break, college closed, Sat. 12/22—Sun. 1/6
B. Other important dates
i) Last day to withdraw from 15-week classes, Tue. 11/20
ii) Final exam week, Tue. 12/11—Mon. 12/17
iii) Grades due, Wed. 12/19 by 4:00 PM
November/December important dates
E. Senate meetings
i) Thu. 11/1, 3:15—5:00 PM, Chesapeake 105
ii) Thu. 11/15, 3:15—5:00 PM, Chesapeake 105
iii) Thu. 12/6, 3:15—5:00 PM, Chesapeake 105
F. Board of Trustees meetings
i) Thu. 11/8, 7:00 PM, Kent 262
ii) Thu. 12/13, 7:00 PM, Kent 262
G. College-wide Forum
i) Wed. 11/7, 2:00—4:00 PM, LSC Community Room B
ii) Wed. 11/21, 2:00—4:00 PM, LSC Community Room B
iii) Wed. 12/5, 2:00—4:00 PM, LSC Community Room B
5. Attachments
A. Letter from the Department of Language Studies regarding benefits
1
6. Reports
A. Senate President
The committee developing the Academic Council proposal met Wednesday, 10/24, and discussed the
issues that Charlene Dukes raised. Hubley will meet with Sandy Dunnington on Monday to discuss the
matter further. One important issue raised by Dukes is how the Council will relate to the CWF, Hubley
said the Academic Council is largely a reorganization of academic affairs. He hoped the final proposal
could go to Dunnington then straight to Dukes, with an “information item” notice going to the CWF.
B. Senate Vice President
Swazette Young reported that the Faculty Evaluation Committee was scheduled to meet on Friday,
November 9. Questions, concerns, and comments could be sent to Young. Hubley asked if he should
send an E-mail to the faculty, notifying them of the committee, and Young answered affirmatively.
C. Representative from President’s Leadership Team
Eldon Baldwin reported that agenda topics were due Friday the 9th. Young and Verna Teasdale are
planning to attend an assessment/governance conference in Philadelphia, December 9th to 11th. He said
that funding is available for others to attend.
D. College-wide Forum
It was reported that the CWF had not met since the last meeting of the Senate.
i) Representative from Faculty Organization
ii) Human Resources Committee
Rik Karlsson submitted the following report electronically: The Committee plans to
 Finalize and submit a proposal on an Alternative Work Schedule for PGCC (unfinished business
from last year).
 Develop and propose a tailored, college-wide Supervisor Training Program (i.e., PGCC-focused
content) that includes new and current supervisors, their evaluation as supervisors, and how they
will be held accountable as supervisors after training.
 Conduct a study of [credit and non-credit] Adjunct Faculty compensation, professional
development opportunities and evaluation process.
 Review PGCC's current Leave Programs and decide if recommendations should be forthcoming
to the CWF.
iii) Budget Advisory Committee
Greg Weiss reported there was no quorum at the last meeting, but a budget is due to the Board of
Trustees soon.
iv) Campus Culture Committee
The committee has been discussing the plan to phase in free employee access to the Natatorium. Last
year the college began a three-part employee satisfaction survey. The first and second parts were
completed. Nobody was sure what happened to the third part.
v) Learning Committee
vi) Technology Steering Committee
Baldwin reported that new computers for faculty are on their way. Old computers will be stored
temporarily, in case someone needs to retrieve something. After that, he’s not sure what happens to
them. There was talk about more technology training as part of professional development. Joe
Rossmeier said he needs input from Academic Affairs and HR.
2
vii) Strategic Planning Committee
viii) Assessment Committee
ix) Facilities Committee
Rosanne Benn reported on a discussion of traffic issues. One topic was finding a safer place to drop
people off. Lots of drop-offs occur now on the “inner loop” making for a lot of congestion and chaos.
There was discussion of closing the inner the roadway so people don’t drop people off. Closing the road
would require state approval; fire trucks/ambulances may need access to that road. Hubley referred to
the rumble strips that were put on the inner loop near the entrance from 202, and he suggested putting in
real speed bumps. Another suggestion was to keep the inner loop open, but close the access from 202;
again, this could cause problems for emergency access. Benn also mentioned discussions of campus
beautification, and an assessment of the need for transportation between campus and the Metro station.
Baldwin mentioned that there is a proposal for a new Purple Line, which has a planned stop for PGCC.
Hubley said he would talk to Dukes about the possibility of getting a shuttle between campus and Metro
for now.
E. Chairs’ Council
F. Adjunct Faculty
Janet Carlson said a meeting is planned for November 8.
G. Representative from the Student Governance Board
7. Old Business
No “old business” was discussed.
8. New Business
A. Discussion of possible short-term disability and domestic partner benefits
Hubley referred to a letter from Language Studies proposing short-term disability and domestic partner
benefits. Len Sekelick reiterated the support from Language Studies. He mentioned, as an example
related to short-term disability, that the college does not have policy for maternity leave. The college
could enter an agreement with a company that provides disability benefits, and make participation
optional for employees. A participating employee would pay the costs of the insurance, the college would
simply enable lower rates than what an individual would get. Given that sick leave will no longer be “front
loaded” this could be an attractive benefit.
Hubley mentioned that the issue of domestic partner benefits was raised under the Williams
administration. Williams said it was a problematic issue, since the county does not offer such benefits.
He did not want the college to be the first county employer to wade into a thorny political issue. Barbara
Sanders noted that we are not competing with the county for good employees, we are competing with
other colleges, many of which offer such benefits.
Hubley asked if the Senate would endorse the letter from Language Studies. Baldwin suggested that
simply sending a letter may not do much, it could just disappear. He suggested drafting official proposals.
Hubley said he believed that Chris Hunt would be willing to work on drafting a proposal for domestic
partner benefits. After discussion and amendments, a motion was put forth to (1) send the existing letter
to Lark Dobson with support from the Senate, and (2) create a committee to draft proposals for short-term
disability benefits and domestic partner benefits (as two separate proposals). The proposals will be sent
to the CWF. The motion passed with twelve votes in favor, none opposed, and one abstention. Hubley
said he would contact Chris Hunt and Esther Robbins to get the process of drafting proposals started.
B. Quality Matters
Hubley said that he had fielded concerns about the Quality Matters program of evaluating online courses.
One concern is the evaluation of our courses by people outside of the college. Another concern is the
3
focus on style, with little or no emphasis on substance. Mahbub Jamal said that one goal of Quality
Matters is to see if an online course is easily navigable by the students. It is not their goal to review
content. The reviewers make pass/fail judgments, and many of our classes are failing. Nicholas Plants
asked if the recommendations of Quality Matters are in any way binding. The answer is “no.” A course
that fails Quality Matters may still be offered. Concern was expressed that an assessment program is in
place without approval from the faculty. Someone asked how this compares to assessment by the
Academic Outcomes Assessment Committee, and Hubley replied that they are two completely separate
assessments.
On a related issue, Hubley mentioned a situation where Lisa Maranto is teaching her entire course load
online, yet she is expected to have five on-campus office hours. Does it make sense to do five hours on
campus for office hours when an entire course load is taught online? If the students are taking online,
then it seems likely the students will be not coming onto campus for office hours. Should there be a
mechanism for online office hours? Leslie Wojciechowicz said that the goal may be to make sure the
instructor spends some time on campus to be engaged with the campus community. Hubley suggested
that a department chair has the task of making sure each member of the department is appropriately
engaged via committee work, attending meetings, etc. Perhaps this also needs to be examined by
someone on the faculty, perhaps Maranto?
Alan Mickelson put forward a motion to assemble a committee to examine these issues related to
distance learning. The motion was amended such that the committee would include at least one
administrator. The motion passed unanimously with twelve votes in favor.
9. Agenda Items for Upcoming Meetings
A. Attendance by VP Dunnington; November 15.
B. Attendance by Mike Gavin and Barb Gage to discuss assessment; December 6
C. Other items?
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 5:00 PM.
4