COSUMNES RIVER COLLEGE
ACADEMIC SENATE
FEBRUARY 9, 2007
MINUTES
(APPROVED)
The meeting convened at 12:30 p.m.
Present: T. Aldredge, M. Barkley, L. Davenport, P. Hansen, C.L. Harris, G.
Hodgkinson, M. Hunter, W. LaNier, E. Lopez, G. Martin, M. McClurg-MacKinnon,
M. Moore, J. Nye, J. Oliver, R. Oxman, S. Palm, T. Parker, C. Sage, L. Sneed, D.
Wassmer
Guests: Bill Karns, Marybeth Buechner, David Aagard
Announcements: Welcome and Introductions
 Pat. Rogan said accounting students are going to assist in filling out tax returns for
students with earned income less than $39,000. Assistance is offered from 10-3 in
BS145a between now and April 15, some Saturdays included, but not spring break.
 Marjorie is looking for input on California Network for Change.
 High school counselors are visiting today. About 50 are here from area schools.
 3 Black History activity events next week.
 Walk around the World in Recital Hall, Tuesday. Look for brochure in Student
Services office or Library for list of all Black History Month activities.
 Basketball game, staff appreciation night Feb. 9, against Delta College. Free pizza if
you wear blue and orange. Women’s game at 6 p.m. and men’s at 8 p.m.
ACTION ITEMS
 Minutes from Jan. 26, 2007 approved with edits.
 Approval of the Agenda with time certain addition for David Aagard’s
presentation.
 SRC Mission -2nd Read (handout). Jamey read the Mission aloud, and it was
moved to discuss. In discussion it was asked if the membership included other
than faculty, such as classified, students, and administrators. If so, it would be
shared governance. If it is not a committee of the Senate, it needs to include all
groups on campus, and they all should have input on vote on to accept the mission
statement. More definition is needed as to whether or not it is a Committee of the
Senate or Shared Governance. Instead of specifying which group of students, it
should just say “two students” so the opportunities can be open to more students.
Ruth moved that we split the document, and vote on purpose without voting on
membership. Changed the wording in purpose to “multiple formats for a variety
of audiences”. Moved and voted in favor of adopting the purpose paragraph
unanimously. The Committee Membership paragraph will be tabled and come
back for discussion. It will be researched by L. Sneed and G. Hodgkinson.
BRIEF REPORTS
Assessment Portability Discussion – David Aagard (Chair of District
Matriculation)









He has served on District Matriculation Committee for last two years. Gordon
Lam brought up topic about a year ago. Question is mostly generating from
Counselors and Student Services: if a student is tested at one school, why can’t
they take that test outcome to a sister college? Sub committee formed for
discussion of assessments, and they met in April, May, and December 2006.
Is it possible to have assessments which are common across the district?
Question was asked, is it possible to come up with a normed test for all
campuses? This would be challenging.
Is there at least a unified approach to have across all schools? Marie Smith invited
assessment subcommittee to VPSSI meeting at the District.
There is no research showing how many students are affected by the current lack
of portability of test scores.
We do have a “multiple measures” process for people who have taken tests on
other campuses which maybe can be looked at as a way to address the issue of
portability. It just needs to be a process which is used consistently.
Question as to legality of taking scores that are normed at one campus and using
them to place a student in courses on another campus has been raised. Legal
counsel is being sought.
A plan is being put in place for research on how to gather information about
assessments and student needs from each campus.
If there is going to be a change across the district, we should use the process that
we have in place through the District Academic Senate.
It is a multi-faceted discussion item which encompasses not only assessment, but
also budget and curriculum issues.
General Education Student Learning Outcomes – Sue Palm, Curriculum Chair
 Second read with change as requested to add the word proficiency in general
education goals. It was moved and seconded to discuss. Under #9 Living Skills
(C6) there was concern that it may not fit every class. All faculty were informed
of the points, and they are broad. Moved and seconded to vote, and it was voted
unanimously to accept the document as written.
President’s Report— G. Hodgkinson
 With compressed calendar there are still a few classes with shorter pass time than
is optimal. Managers are to discuss it with faculty so people will be prepared to
deal with the issue as it relates to rooms clearing and the next class getting into
the room.
 Compressed calendar is calculating the time for each course within a given range.
 A small group of folks are being appointed to a group to continue discussion
regarding compressed calendar. Sue Palm will represent the Senate.
 Enrollment report shows positive growth of 3.81% at CRC and 4.66% over the
District.
 Shared Governance Committees are being reviewed both on campus and at
District level.
 District is looking to move to an online recruiting process so applicants who wish
to work for district can apply online instead of with paper. Paper applications will
still be available.



Rules of the Game report by legislative analyst at CSUS. Union presented their
rebuttal. It was asked if we could add it to the agenda for discussion as a group?
CASSL, PD, and Academic Integrity Committees will host an open discussion
next Thursday at 2 p.m. Email will be sent out confirming this.
Marie Smith is retiring and the position for Vice Chancellor will close this month.
Reona James will be on the committee for CRC, along with three other faculty
members from other campuses.
Next spring we will hire a new Dean of Student Services and Enrollment among
other administrative positions.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
 Bill Karns spoke on SLO’s, Assessment, and Accreditation. He just came from
first meeting on planning accreditation for fall 2009. Handout of letter from the
President of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges.
CRC is commended in the letter for our response to recommendations, thorough
analysis and description of progress, as well as for providing evidence and
samples to support our report.
 Bill also shared draft of our comprehensive accreditation timeline. This
fall we should be planning and mapping what happens across the district.
Sue Lorimer, VPI at Folsom is being trained for site visits.
 Guide to Evaluating Institutions is a seminal document for preparing for
accreditation. It discusses evidence and the things that will be looked for
during the accreditation. It contains standards; all faculty are encouraged
to look it over.
 Program Student Learning Outcomes should be visible and improvements
should be visible in the college based on these. We will need to look at
what assessments will look like.
 Student Services is included; they wonder how they will be able to keep
track of information. SARS (Admissions and Records) is a new software
system that will be able to track all treatments for all students by ID
number, and is underway, but who will have access?
 What is the role of faculty in the next piece of assessments and
accreditation? Marybeth spoke from CASSL: there are course
assessments as done by each faculty, and there is institutional data that
tracks how students progress through programs.
 When we first were told to work on SLO’s we talked around campus as to
what folks thought were their outcomes already. The college-wide
outcomes were developed after looking at committees and focus groups.
Program and course level SLOs were worked on by individual faculty.
There were workshops for faculty and shared governance committees also
worked on them. It was suggested that the Guide to Evaluating
Institutions could be used to see how we are doing. Bill says it doesn’t
contain much regarding assessments, but it does have good samples of
evidence we should be coming up with.
 When we have so many SLO’s it is harder to come up with assessments
that adequately test success in all.
 Don’t forget to include Co-curricular activities as part of the student
learning outcomes.
 A tool with glossary of terms and considerations when working with
assessments would be helpful. Maureen tasked Georgine with getting a

document for faculty to work with, and suggested that she goes
department by department to share the information with faculty
individually.
 Models of assessment should be made available to faculty in a central
location, such as the CASSL, suggested Gary Martin.
 Perhaps a committee could work through the ideas, and then bring back
some more information to the Senate at large. W, LaNier, Dana W., CL.
Harris, Marybeth Buechner, Sue Palm, and Norv Wellsfry will discuss
with Georgine. Bill will provide the report he brought to look over. Gary
Martin hopes that the committee will provide an outline on how to get
started.
Please look over animal care and use; they were dinged by their accrediting
institute. They would like to be removed from shared governance, so they can
meet the demands of their accrediting body. They would still be seen as
providing their service to the college. Jamey sent around Ed Initiative report.
Colette asked if we could agendize that for next meeting.
Future Discussion Items:
TO DO:
 Follow up with BJ concerning late add students and his Committee of Chairs.
 Research the Committee Membership for SRC with Linda Sneed.
 Student Tracking System – check AR and the system they use to see what services
students have used. SARS? Other?
 What is the role of faculty in the next piece of assessment and accreditation?
Maureen tasked Georgine with getting a document for faculty to work with, and
suggested that she goes department by department to share the information with
faculty individually.
ADJOURNMENT at 2:05 p.m.
Next Meeting:
February 23, 2007, Orchard Room
Minutes respectfully submitted by Marjorie Duffy.