Approved Minutes
Sacramento City College
Academic Senate
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
President: Ginni May
Vice-President: Greg Rose
Secretary: Troy Myers
Past-President: Connie Zuercher
Senators Present: Josh Roberts, Laura Leek, Karen Kunimura, Andrew Jones, Lonnie Larson, Jared
Anderson, Patti Redmond, Lori Petite, Leila Stone, Adam Freas, Deborah Gambrell, Chris Seddon, Jon
Hanson, Steve Cirrone, Amy Zannakis, Gayle Pitman, Norman Lorenz, Joseph Phillips, Randy
Rosenberger, Susan Griffin, Andrea Greenwell, Gabriella Nuttall, Debra Crumpton, Lynne Giovannetti,
Adrian Chevraux-FitzHugh.
Senators Absent: Maha Edlbi, Robin Roffey, Darlene Arnold, John Herlihy, Sue Carriere, Angelia
Jovanovic, Donna Nacey, Marcie MacMillan, Simeon Okoroike, Kim Beyrer, Clay Bratton, Dena
Chubbic, Roxanne Tambert.
Guests: Victoria Henderson, Nadine Kirkpatrick, Nicole Woolley, Rick Woodmansee, Annette Barfield,
Ginnie Gessford.
Call to Order: meeting called to order by Ginni at 12:00.
Approval of Minutes: approved by consensus.
Introductions
Reports:
Budget – Greg Rose: the current state budget news is not good; it is important for all faculty to remember the
Governor’s initiative, co-sponsored with CFT. Based on current numbers, if the initiative does not pass the six
percent pay cut across the District appears very likely. There will also be further section cuts. It is very
important that faculty support the Brown/CFT Tax Initiative.
Forensics Resolution Update: we do not need to go forward with the Forensics Resolution as there have been
appropriate changes to Title 5 language. Sincere thanks to all who worked so hard on this, and of course, to our
champion Forensics’ Team!
Standing Committee Reports:
PRIE – Adrian Chevraux-Fitzhugh: last year the focus was on the success rates of first year freshman; this year
PRIE is looking at how student proceed through the college in terms of programs and pathways. Our average
student on a semester takes about eight units and successfully completes six of those. Adrian noted that we are
doing about as well as our peer colleges based on the ARCC reports. Currently, about 60 percent of our students
reach a milestone within six years. Adrian reminded us of the significant economic factors many of our students
face which contribute to their success rates. PRIE is interested in hearing from faculty about how they are
helping students navigate our system and reach their goals. Faculty can contact Adrian directly via his campus
email.
Staff Development – Nadine Kirkpatrick
Staff Development has a Coordinator position which used to receive 100 percent reassigned time funding; now
that funding is at 50 percent and that number cannot be increased. Their current challenge is to figure out how
to organize staff development with half the prior resources for their Coordinator. Also, Nadine reminded us that
a document circulating in campus email discussing possible ways to restructure Staff Development was not
from their committee; they are working on their own document. The Staff Development Committee would like
to open the Coordinator position to both full and part time faculty. They feel a part timer could do an excellent
job if it were the right person. The Senate needs to decide if part time applicants will be included in the pool as
well. Nadine fears allowing only full time applicants may result in few applicants. Ginni asked the Senate to
share the information with their divisions that the position is being advertised. Nadine noted that the job
description may need to be rewritten because of the cut in funding level. The announcement for the position
however, has gone out. The closing date is May 1st.
Announcements:
Researcher Position: Ginni wants to form a subcommittee of the Senate to discuss the process of hiring a new
faculty researcher. Should we break up the available sixty percent release time among two or more people, one
to do research and one to handle SLO’s? What would be the rationale for having more than one person? One
person could perhaps do SLO assessment with .2, say, but Ginni feels that this is less than desirable. The good
news is that we now have a commitment from the District to fund this position indefinitely. Once the committee
forms, we would need their work to be completed as soon as possible. There is a job description, but things
have changed, and we would like to update the old description. Susan and Norman volunteered. Should they
bring back their recommendation on May 1st or let the committee work on its own? A motion was made to give
the committee the authority to move independently. Passed with four abstentions.
Staff Resource Center Coordinator Position: Do we want to allow part time faculty to apply? We would like
to see the job description first. Would the person have to lobby Deans for resources? That process might work
best with a full timer who feels more confident pressing for resources when they are needed. Someone noted
that the right part timer might be quite capable. Someone else felt part timers may be intimidated by meeting
with Administrators. The Senate felt they needed time to consider this question. One key question was will this
affect part-timer preference since it is a non-teaching role? We need to find this answer. The Senate decided to
wait and discuss this question again at the next meeting.
Accreditation: Karen has very little time to finish the initial draft and needs input soon. She will also be
contacting Department Chairs for evidence as well as looking at some older Senate minutes. Our report is due
October 15th. How much evidence for SLO compliance do we need? Any SLO evidence we have needs to be
available over the summer; Rick Woodmansee will take the information so that it is available for the
Accreditation commission.
OLD BUSINESS
Special Meeting: are there any comments or edits on the first draft of the White Paper? Our plan is to send it to
the entire Administration. A few suggestions were made and those edits will be sent to Ginni.
District IT Roster ID Request
G. May
Resolution 2011.5 from CRC : do we want the District IT to put student ID photos on Peoplesoft? One online
instructor spoke out in favor. Our understanding is that the photos would not automatically populate to D2L.
Would we get photos every time we printed our rosters? We will ask. What about resources needed to make the
change? One Senator has asked students who have shared privacy concerns. Someone else noted that we see our
students in our classes anyway. Motion made and seconded to support the CRC Resolution. Motion passed.
Campus Issue 11-12-05
Formation of SCC Sustainability Committee: Moved and passed to create a SCC Sustainability Committee;
motion passed with one abstention.
Hiring Prioritization Forms/Process
G. May
Ginni distributed the current draft form. Someone noted we probably only need a single signature from the
Office of Instruction to verify the information. Information is coming from more than one place, but the Senate
is asking that Instruction sign off to verify the information from the Deans, PRIE and Student Services, etc.
Our understanding is that this was past practice. The fact was stressed again that the Senate must have accurate
information in the hiring packets.
NEW BUSINESS
SLO Assessment Reports
C. Sjovold
As we prepare the midterm Accreditation report, there is concern about whether we are meeting Accreditation
expectations. For some faculty, the current Union Contract does not seem to be in full compliance with
Accreditation standards (the language in question is in Section 8). In short, could it be the case that a faculty
member could be in compliance with the LRCFT Contract and perhaps not be meeting Accreditation
expectations? If this is the case, what is the Senate’s role? We could produce a set of best practices. Annette
believes that however the curriculum has been written, the Contract requires us to assess student learning
according to that curriculum. Perhaps the best time to discuss this complex issue would be at our August retreat
meeting. Carl would like to see stronger language in the Contract. Accreditation is an external mandate and we
must meet Accreditation standards both as faculty and administration. It was also noted that “we are not the
cops,” and the Deans must be involved. Volunteers for the SLO subcommittee: Josh, Annette, Connie,
Gayle, Lonnie.
Out-of-Discipline Prerequisite Plan
L. Larson
We will vote on this on May 1st. The Plan has already been distributed. The Plan allows for a new process to
justify pre-requisites.
NEXT MEETING: May 1, 2012, RHN 258, noon
To place items on future agendas, please email Ginni May at mayv@scc.losrios.edu