COSUMNES RIVER COLLEGE
ACADEMIC SENATE
MARCH 23, 2007
MINUTES
(APPROVED APRIL 13)
The meeting convened at 12:30 p.m.
Present: T. Aldredge, M. Barkley, C. Carter, K. Codella, M. Duffy, P. Hansen, E.
Hoskins, W. LaNier, E. Lopez, M. McClurg-MacKinnon, M. Moore, J. Nye, J.
Oliver, S. Palm, T. Parker, L. Sneed, BJ Snowden, N. Wellsfry.
Announcements: Welcome and Introductions
 Travis thanked folks for helping with scholarships for the speaker evening. It was
very successful.
ACTION ITEMS
 Minutes from March 9, 23, 2006 approved by consensus.
 Approval of the Agenda with addition of first read of proposal for African
American Student Success Programs to go to statewide AS Area A meeting.
 G. Martin asked if we could look at hiring guidelines for CRC faculty so the
process doesn’t go too slowly, and cause us to lose potential candidates.
BRIEF REPORTS
President’s Report— J. Nye for Hodgkinson
 None this month.
Ed Initiative – Snowden and Nye  There will be a Board meeting in May. We will present what has worked and
what they have done, why, and future plans. The goal is to affect more students,
not just small cohorts. Whole district will present at that meeting. Elements of
different programs that seem to be progressing may be adopted. Research will be
presented, although there is a limit to the amount that is available since many of
the programs are so new. Freshman Seminar will continue, but it needs to be
made more permanent, instead of merely a temporary 499 class.
 Question asked if there is a distinction between Freshman Seminar and the HCD
classes. There have been past discussions and can be procured from past meeting
notes. It has not yet been institutionalized as curriculum however, so please
review and contact BJ Snowden if there are concerns.
 Freshman Seminar was to be placed within various disciplines, and not just part of
student services. It is a challenge to find full time faculty who can fit it in their
load, as well as to find classrooms.
Compressed Calendar –
 Committee not present for reporting. Please look at schedules for next semester,
and whether or not we need to consider a change to the Senate meeting time of
Fridays at 12:30. Maureen Moore and Julie Oliver will have conflicts. Science

faculty is scheduling labs on Friday and Saturday, and most will not be able to
attend committees as a result. This should be looked into – it is a big concern if
an entire area cannot participate due to labs.
Perhaps we can look at all the assigned Senators at the start of next year and look
at the meeting time then.
Election Process is moving forward. There is one candidate only for each position.
Voting will take place on April 13th.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
 Jamey went to Chancellor’s Cabinet this week. Assessment came up and there is
an interest by BoG, and Board of Trustees to see assessments that are portable
between campuses. Not necessarily standardized, but at least being able to take
the assessment results from one campus and use it for adding classes on another
campus. ESL was suggested as a model because they already have some
assessments that are used across the district.
 Portability has been showed to affect only about 1% of the students district wide.
 Statewide there is a push to have a standardized test across the state. At the state
level they are hoping to have it implemented in 7 months, see Steve Bruckman
article on Matriculation Assessment Placement.
 Many of our current instruments for assessing are developed outside the state of
California. We would like to investigate getting more local control.
 Estella will attend the Assessment of Ca. Community Colleges meeting and bring
back report.
 Norv Wellsfry was absent but Unit Planning update draft was handed out.
Francisco asked if we would review and give feedback. It looks similar to
articulation or strategic plans. Politically this is a way to control spending, and
have a connection between planning and accreditation.
 Planning should be more global, and not make it mandatory that line items show
up in ProF or Unit Plan in order to get funded. More global update of materials,
rather than line items. This might make the planning get down to the daily level.
Who will actually be completing the Unit plan. Is there a process and timeline? It
should be possible for faculty to participate and still get materials/ supplies for
student success.
Chuck Van Patten presented: Three roles that speak for faculty (other than our own
voices) are
Senate Voices
Chairs
Union
Senate
Authority from:
Article 2
Rada Act
AB 1725
Domain:
Department Matters Work Place,
Academic and
negotiate disputes /
Professional matters
grievances
Administrator:
Area Dean
Deans
Upper Management
Chuck would like to address these roles at a campus level and see how our culture has
evolved over the years. It seems to him to be more hierarchical, rather than as democratic
as it has been. Do others perceive there has been a cultural shift as well? Should we have
discussions on how Senate and Union can partner to address this? It was asked if training
of management was needed? (It was noted that managers are assigned a mentor when
they are hired). There is strength in unity, and it was asked what the results would be if
Senate and Union joined up on this. Question: “is really a problem?” Anecdotal
comments: faculty across departments have been heard to discuss the problems with
new/inexperienced Deans who do not have instructional experience. We should have
independence and the ability to direct our programs rather than have the running of our
programs be dictated. General level of dissatisfaction may be/is growing among faculty.
Faculty are more interested in supporting students and talking to each other about how to
better affect their teaching and student learning, than discussion about structuring SLOs
(for example). How does CASSL fit into this? The topic may need to be discussed
further with ideas for how to work with administration. Perhaps invite more faculty to
discuss it first, and then perhaps invite Francisco to come to a future senate meeting.
Executive team of Senate may need to look at setting aside specific time for a public
hearing/scope meeting/review discussion…on faculty perceptions.
Mark Hunter moved to suspend the rules and accept the African American Student
Success Programs Resolution. It was edited with the addition of a resolution by Gary
Martin to make it time sensitive. Reference to Puente was removed, and that article
edited. Teresa will make edits and forward it. It was moved and passed to be sent to
Area A.
Future Discussion Items:
TO DO:
 Update Shared Governance Meeting Times document and make available to
consider.
 Re-agendize Unit Plan Development with request for Norv to have time certain
presentation.
 Look at setting up future meeting for all faculty to have input on campus culture.
ADJOURNMENT at 2:06 p.m.
Next Meeting:
April 13, 2007, Orchard Room
Minutes respectfully submitted by Marjorie Duffy