Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Research Report
Sacramento City College
Working
Together
Pursuing
Excellence
Inspiring
Achievement
Office of Planning, Research, and Institutional
Effectiveness (PRIE)
Marybeth Buechner
Summary Report
Communication & Governance Survey
Effectiveness of Decision-Making at Sacramento City College
OCTOBER 2014
1
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Communication and Decision-making Survey
During Spring 2011 the PRIE Office and the PIO conducted a survey about decision-making and
communication at Sacramento City College. Over 160 SCC employees responded to the survey including 105
faculty, 42 classified staff and 10 administrators. The survey was repeated in Fall 2014. At that time 223 SCC
employees responded to the survey; the greatest increase in response number was from classified staff was.
Overall, survey results indicate that respondents see communication and decision-making at the college as
effective; however the ratings in some areas have dropped since 2011.
Many of the respondents have been active in the decision-making processes of the college. Over 200 SCC
employees responded to the Fall 2014 survey including 115 faculty, 91 classified staff and 17 administrators.
The number of respondents increased from the 2011 survey to the 2014 survey. Most survey respondents have
been at SCC for more than 3 years. About half of the respondents have been at SCC for 10 or more years. This
is very similar for the 2011 and 2014 surveys. Involvement in campus processes was greatest for administrators
and lowest for classified staff. Percentages of those active in these areas were mostly slightly higher in the 2014
survey compared to the 2011 survey.
Overall, college employees report moderate levels of engagement with decision-making at the college. .
College employees feel knowledgeable about items related to engagement with college decision making.
Relatively few respondents answered “Don’t know.” About two-thirds of employees report moderate to high
levels of engagement on most of the survey items related to decision-making at the college. The lowest rating
was to the question about the degree to which their jobs allow time to participate in college decision making –
over 50% responded “low” to that item. Classified staff expressed relative low engagement, and administrators
expressed relatively high engagement. Ratings of several items related to engagement in decision-making
declined from 2011 to 2014
Overall, SCC employees agree that college communication is effective. However ratings are lower than in the
2011 survey. SCC employees feel knowledgeable about the effectiveness of college communication. Relatively
few respondents answered “Don’t know” to these items. The most common answer to items related to the
effectiveness of communication was “agree”. The percent strongly agreeing or agreeing is considerable lower
than in the 2011 survey. This is especially noticeable in the responses of the classified staff, where all items
declined by more than 10 percentage points. Administrators were generally agreed more that communication is
effective than did other groups
There is a wide range of opinion about the degree to which administrative processes work effectively.
“Agree” was the most common response to some of the items in this area. However, “Neutral” was the most
common response to the prompt about administrative processes at the broad level of the whole college. Ratings
in some areas, for some groups, increased from 2011 to 2014 while others decreased. For 2014 the overall
pattern in the percent of respondents who agreed or strongly with statements indicating understanding of
administrative structures and processes was Administrators > Faculty > Classified staff.
It appears that college employees are not generally knowledgeable about the effectiveness of the constituency
leadership groups. “Don’t know” was the most common response to most of these items for faculty and
classified staff respondents. For respondents who did not mark “don’t know” the ratings of the effectiveness of
the constituency groups varied widely. Each employee group was knowledgeable about its own constituency
leadership. Administrators were most knowledgeable about the effectiveness of the constituency leadership
groups. The pattern was similar to that of the 2011 survey.
2
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Effectiveness of Decision-Making at Sacramento City College
Governance Structures and Communication Survey
Introduction
Decision making at Sacramento City College includes a wide range of organizations and processes. This work
takes a lot of time and effort and involves numerous avenues of communication. The PRIE Office and the PIO
are jointly conducted a survey about how decision-making and communication venues work at Sacramento City
College. We did this for several reasons: In order to do help the college work more effectively, we pause from
time to time to ask ourselves what is working well and what could be improved. In these interesting budget
times, it behooves us to listen to one another and plan well. In our last accreditation self-study, we promised to
gather information about how our communication and decision-making processes work. The Sacramento City
College 2009 Accreditation Self Study included the following planning agenda items:
 Standards I.A.3, I.B.3, I.B.6, III.A.6, III.B.2.b, III.D.2.b, IV.A.2, IV.B.3.f - Effective Communication:
By spring 2010, the College President and the Public Information Officer (PIO) will convene a task
force to evaluate and report on the effectiveness of the numerous paths of communication, training, and
dissemination of information used to promote broad-based understanding and engagement in such
College processes as planning and governance. This report will be reviewed for feedback through the
constituency process outlined in the Blue Book with implementation of approved methods by spring
2011.
 Standard IV.A.5 – Effectiveness of governance structures: Beginning in 2009-2010, the PRIE Dean
will standardize the process for obtaining feedback on the effectiveness of the College governance
structures and broaden the dissemination of results to the campus community.
In Fall 2009 an initial draft of a survey on the effectiveness of governance at SCC developed and presented at
Executive Council, Pres. Cabinet, AS, and CS. In Spring 2010 the draft survey was piloted with participation
by constituency leaders and councils. Results provided to the College President and Executive Council. In Fall
2010 the results of the draft survey were discussed with the CSPC and the standing committee tri-chairs.
Because of the related planning agenda item on communication effectiveness, it was decided to conduct focus
groups to help develop survey questions that focus on effective college communication and on effective
decision making at the college.
A task force was convened by the PIO and met Spring 2010. In Fall 2010 the PIO and PRIE dean conducted
focus groups for each constituency in order to develop survey items. This work resulted in the combination of
the survey of the effectiveness of governance structures with the survey of communication effectiveness. The
combined survey was administered in Spring 11. A 3-year survey administration cycle was planned.
The survey was subsequently administered again in Fall 2014. The originally scheduled Spring 2014
administration was moved to Fall because the District Office administered a district-wide employee survey in
Spring 2014 and requested that the colleges not administer any similar surveys that semester.
The results of the survey are shared with the College President, the Senior Leadership Team, the Academic
Senate, the Classified Senate, the Associated Student Government and the SCC Standing Committees and the
Department Chairs Council. The data becomes part of the Institutional Effectiveness that the PRIE Office
produces for the College Strategic Planning Committee and the PRIE Committee and will be used in the
accreditation mid-term report. The Communication and Governance is also one of the surveys to provide
information used for the preparation of the accreditation Self-Evaluation written by SCC.
3
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Results
Respondents
Over 200 SCC employees responded to the Fall 2014 survey including 115 faculty, 91 classified staff and 17
administrators. The number of respondents increased from the 2011 survey to the 2014 survey. The increase in
response number from classified staff is especially notable.
Number of respondents
2011 survey
2014 survey
Faculty
105
115
Classified staff
42
91
Administrator
10
17
To which SCC constituency do you belong?
2014 Communication and Governance Survey
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Faculty
Classified staff
Administrator
Most survey respondents have been at SCC for more than 3 years. About half of the respondents have been at
SCC for 10 or more years. This is very similar for the 2011 and 2014 surveys.
2011
Survey
2014
Survey
Percent of respondents who
answered the question who…
Have been at SCC more than 3
years
Have been at SCC more than 3
years
Faculty
Classified staff Administrators
89%
71%
70%
90%
81%
94%
Many of the respondents have been active in the decision-making processes of the college including standing
committees, senates and councils, the campus issues process, and division/unit planning discussions.
Involvement in these activities was greatest for administrators and lowest for classified staff. Percentages of
those active in these areas were mostly slightly higher in the 2014 survey compared to the 2011 survey.
4
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Faculty
Percent of respondents who…
Served on standing committees
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
Member of senate or representative council
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
Used the campus issues process
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
Are active in planning discussions in division or unit
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
Served on other college groups (e.g. BSI, FSAG, etc.)
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
Been involved in college initiatives, grants, or projects
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
Classified
Staff
Administrators
81%
82%
57%
62%
100%
94%
46%
51%
29%
32%
80%
81%
20%
24%
7%
14%
40%
35%
86%
88%
60%
65%
100%
100%
Not applicable - not asked on the 2011 survey
63%
40%
94%
Not applicable - not asked on the 2011 survey
37%
23%
93%
What other opportunities have you had to participate in decision-making in your department/unit or in
the broader college setting?
- Our department discusses all shared governance issues and collectively decides on our course of action.
- Department meetings with the Academic Senate President.
Served on committees for the prior two accreditation cycles. Have served as department chair. Have served on
numerous faculty and classified staff hiring committees. Participated in the development of the department's
certificate program.
I have been involved in decisions regarding student learning outcomes.
Create Unit Plans, Program Plans, and Student Learning Outcomes
Make decision concerning new and replacement laboratory equipment, make decisions on classroom equipment in
Daivs Out Reach Center,
Far too many to name here.
Talked with president
too numerous to name
Accreditation, meetings with faculty from other colleges in Los Rios.
I have served on many search committees, Intra- district committees, regional committees including state
Chancellor's Office consultation groups.
Department meetings.
Wait! I've had the opportunity to serve, but rarely have I been heard on these bodies.
Election of the textbook to be used in all of our classes.
Many and varied opportunities to participate in decision making processes
Senior Leadership Team, Joint Dean's Council, other deans mtgs
The hiring process for Classified staff and Counselors
n/a
Training and disciplinary commettee
Nothing.
Division Meetings - But it's not really the arena for decision making
Strategic Planning
5
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
none
curriculum
No comment
None since 2001
curriculm development
Department chair; facilitator of flex events; curriculum committee, sub-committee and incoming faculty chair;
interview process for new faculty and Dean; scholarship committee; peer reviewer on multiple performance review
teams
district wide development of the iSEP
I have attended flex workshops on the new SSSP Plan and the Student Equity Program Plan. I have attended the
recent convocation charettes.
none
I've participated on accreditation writing teams, the mission/vision/values charette, and other campus-wide
charettes.
A large variety.
I am on the District Reading Competency Committee. I am involved in the California Assessment Initiative and the
CB21 group.
Focus groups for hiring
Hiring committees
Our department has an active development process that includes budgetary, course development, and operational
concerns. I am the department Chair.
I checked "No" above, but I have written--and received funds for--a project I designed: Man Up Peer Mentoring
Program for men of color at SCC.
I can be heard in department meetings but cannot vote on anything because I am a part-timer (who has been at
SCC for 23 years)
District-wide committees that impact SCC.
I participated in a committee to improve the specificity and clarity of the Course Outline for English Writing 300. I'm
not sure if that counts as a standing committee or a planning discussion.
I was involved with creating the coordinator position in Student Leadership and Development as well as the course
being taught in that area.. Student Government and student clubs were under a specialist position.
I have served as my department's chair.
Securing funding for the ESL Center for materials purchases.
Decision making is limited. Many decisions are overridden by a domineering Dean.
NA
Assessment instrument development, multiple measurement development for assessment, department chairship,
accreditation standard chair as faculty member and as administrator, standing committee tri-chair of several
committees (Curriculum, Matriculation, LRC, Staff Equity & Diversity), student mentor, workshop presenter
Long standing member of the California Community College Nursing Advisory Committee to the Chancellor's Office.
I lead Faculty and Nursing Curriculum meetings. Chair Nursing Advisory Meetings. Member of CA Community
College Associate Degree Director's Committee.
I serve as department chair.
Department meetings.
Co-lead on the CAERC.
department chair duties
I lobbied for professional development support.
I serve on the SLOAC committee
marketing and development
Dept Chair.
District wide development committees and users groups
Charettes
Broad participation in many committees at both the unit and college level like the Work Load Committee, SLT,
Deans Council, Deans/Chairs meetings, Distance Education, etc.
I am a department chair,
6
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Capital Campaign -Health Professions
Advancement Program Plan
SCC Foundation Board-Planning
Tri chair of a campus committee.
Accreditation team member
The items above cover the main ways.
hiring committees
department meetings
Few, as administrators have abrogated all authority to themselves recently.
CSPC
Hiring Committees both at college and district
Accreditation Committees
Executive Council
Modernization Projects
Served on accreditation teams
none
Student Success & Support Plan, Student Equity Plan, and how they connect to professional development across
the institution
I have to assertively include myself. I am rarely included otherwise.
N/A
curriculum and program development, textbook adoptions, special projects, advisory committees
SSSP projects, expanding student services, tutoring, computer resources.
i thought I was serving on an HSI project, but was never included following a couple of meetings. I never heard
anything else regarding this project...I still haven't "officially" heard the outcome, only rumors that we were denied,
but no formal meeting or communication yet.....
Outreach activities, conferences
As part time faculty, I have had to seek out and make time to participate (at no pay). I participated in a departmental
decision to implement a prerequisite.
I generally make decisions that concern my job and the instructional area I oversee. I have served on hiring
committees and participated in those particular hiring decisions.
Department meetings
Department Chairs Council
I'm a classified staff member working in an Instructional area. My dean is very receptive to feedback and solicits my
opinion, but full-time faculty drive the unit-planning process almost exclusively. In the broader college setting, I feel
like there are opportunities to participate in decision-making if one actually makes the effort to actively participate
(committees, senates, self-study writing team, equity rep for hiring committees, etc.).
scholarship committee
hiring committees
none
I have had many opportunities, most of which have led to little action or change. Many have had negative
repercussions on my professional credibility and limited options for professional development because I was not a
"yes" person.
SSSP campus plan & Student Equity Plan;
Basic Skills Initiative; accreditation and other planning and writing.
I have been chair for 4 years. I have initiated a new academic program.
different ways of communicating to outside resources
I have been on committees within my division.
VOLUNTEERED TWO YEARS FOR COMMENCEMENT. THAT'S IT.
Classified staff run events like Connections and LRCEA CWT sub-committee.
Division-level decision making teams.
None.
Providing feedback to other managers, participating in "pathways" projects, program review.
7
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Engagement with college decision-making
Overall, college employees report moderate levels of engagement with decision-making at the college. .
College employees feel knowledgeable about items related to engagement with college decision making.
Relatively few respondents answered “Don’t know.” About two-thirds of employees report moderate to high
levels of engagement on most of the survey items related to decision-making at the college. The lowest rating
was to the question about the degree to which their jobs allow time to participate in college decision making –
over 50% responded “low” to that item.
The following items ask about engagement with decision making at the college. For this survey "engagement"
means an active attention to and willingness to participate in the processes of decision making.
High
Moderate
Low
Don't
Response
2014 Survey
Know
Count
My personal sense of engagement with college
63
90
85
1
239
decision making is...
In general, engagement in decision making across
22
104
86
27
239
the college is...
The degree to which engagement with decision
47
90
81
18
236
making is expected of SCC employees is...
The degree to which engagement with decision
41
75
100
21
237
making is valued by college administration is...
The degree to which my job allows time for me to
28
78
129
4
239
participate in college decision making is...
skipped question
15
Classified staff expressed relative low engagement, and administrators expressed relatively high engagement.
Ratings of several items related to engagement in decision-making declined from 2011 to 2014
Engagement in college decision-making: Percent of “high” or “moderate” responses by constituency
groups. (Changes of 10 or more percentage points from 2011 to 2014 are noted by bold italics)
My personal sense of engagement with college
decision making is...
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
In general, engagement in decision making across
the college is...
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
The degree to which engagement with decision
making is expected of SCC employees is...
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
The degree to which engagement with decision
making is valued by college administration is...
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
The degree to which my job allows time for me to
participate in college decision making is...
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
Faculty
Classified staff
Administrator
72%
68%
58%
51%
100%
100%
53%
50%
63%
49%
70%
94%
60%
48%
58%
41%
70%
100%
54%
62%
58%
48%
100%
88%
57%
45%
60%
37%
100%
88%
8
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
What things (activities, interactions, etc.) make you feel engaged and encouraged to participate in college
decision making?
I do not feel particularly able to be 'engaged', since I teach during the college hour and have therefore not been
able to join many committees (e.g. Academic Senate). Based on my interactions with other members of my
department who ARE able to join committees, however, it's clear to me that although many faculty and staff are
clearly engaged, there is a distinct lack of reciprocity/support/shared governance from the administration.
Activities and interactions that result in improvement and progress in student opportunities for rigorous and quality
learning.
Participation in professional development activities. To collaborate with other departments to create opportunities
for student success.
When I see evidence of the use of feedback from the faculty in decision making processes.
When the faculty opinion is not only taken into account in the planning but the timeliness in which it is asked.
Many meetings are set up in a manner that suits managers/classified schedules. Faculty cannot suddenly make
themselves available for a meeting.
Research unit's interest in basic skills.
Informative emails; committee meetings; department meetings.
A need to move forward particularly in finding ways to increase student success.
I feel disconnected in many ways. I suppose I don't feel I have a voice because we have a Dean who doesn't really
listen or value what the division says. I also feel that most of the Administrators have a set agenda of what they
want to do, and don't really care what faculty or classified say.
I feel engaged by the many ways employees are encouraged to share their perspectives. This survey is a great
exams that what I have to say matters. I love SCC and feel the leadership is very supportive! We are very lucky at
this college to have such capable and inclusive managers,
When administration/management treats me as a professional and not as an enemy to the institution. Why do
students have the backing of due process when they complain about an unfair grade or a biased instructor, yet
when I complain about a staff person not doing her job I am the one who is held under scrutiny? This is a Double
standard when a legal issue is at stake with regards to the protection of the institution; employees (faculty) do not
merit such protection or respect. So, why should I feel engaged or encouraged to participate--when I know that
push comes to shove the institution protects itself and not me as a "valued" employee.
teaching
Importance to the College and students re: the issues at hand, as communicated with students, staff, faculty and
administrators
Being asked to assume a tri-chair role on a standing committee or being asked to facilitate a work group
When I am given an opportunity to give my opinion and advice before a decision is made.
A supervisor who is also engaged in the decision making through standing committees and also encourages their
staff to participate as well--basically leading by example and setting the expectation. This should also be combined
with an adjustment to employees' workload (including tasks deadlines) to allow for their participation. In addition,
their participation should be valued and reflected in their performance evaluation. I would feel more encouraged in
such an environment.
I think there's plenty of outreach, plenty of encouragement to engage... But it rings hollow because the results
aren't there. Engagement does not, in my experience, result in any meaningful change. At best, the process is
impotent. More often, it appears to serve as a rubber stamp. I'd be encouraged if there were evidence of
meaningful change arising from the process.
Classified Senate
Administration encourages engagement but doesn't always want to hear what the groups have to say or are simply
giving lip service to the official decision making process.
The most recent effort on the Student Equity Plan has been a new model of engagement. It has been outstanding
and makes me feel engaged and encouraged to participate. Aside from this effort it seems much of our input from
Standing Committees goes no where and we are completely left out of the loop by Senior Leadership.
none
when management listens to suggestions and acts on them
9
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Respect.... which is significantly lacking
Interactions involving students and student needs.
interactions with all people at SCC Staff and students. Treating all employees as being a usefully part of the
college including the non academic
Where I feel my input can make an actual difference. So that tends to be at the department level.
I feel more engaged when more people in our campus community get involved. When I see the same faces at
every meeting it makes me feel less motivated because it is clear than many on our campus are not engaged.
Being invited to serve as a member or tri-chair on campus and district standing committees, to serve on advisory
committees, to serve at decision making meetings of various types at the campus level and the district level and
the state chancellor's level about such topics as the consideration of implementing new district-wide software
and/or databases, new initiatives, new programs, what types of data and statistics are we collecting and why, and
what are the anticipated goals and what are the actual outcomes of all of the above. But also having substantial
classified members representation on these committees, at least 4 or 5 classifieds; and varied classified
representation from many different departments.
implementation of previous activities that involved participatory decision making.
Service on standing and senate committees
charettes, convocation, flex workshops, campus committee meetings, division and department meetings,
accreditation committees, student learning outcomes, unit plans
I feel engaged and encouraged because I am passionate about so many issues. However, even though I'm highly
engaged, I still experience a lot of institutional barriers that prevent me from being as effectively engaged as I
could be.
When I am asked to suggest solutions and my advice (as a faculty member) is actually considered when decisions
are made and incorporated in the final decision. I felt my participation was meaningful in hiring committees for
faculty, administrators, and staff. In addition, I feel engaged when information about important issues for faculty is
shared in a timely manner so that I have time to think and give feedback.
Topics that affect my area directly arouse my engagement. Participating in standing committees, given enough
time
Workshops/presentations about new college issues, initiatives
lower workload
Face to face, informal meetings with a small group of people with plenty of time to review materials beforehand.
Chair's Council, Academic Senate, active participation in college-wide artistic activities.
The salary of full time faculty assumes some time spent on college decision making and they are compensated
accordingly. The salary for adjunct faculty does NOT include such an assumption - if there was a stipend for
participation in decision making, that would indicate to me that the college administration values adjunct input.
When larger issues--e.g., moving basic skills courses to Adult Ed--are seriously run by faculty before being
approved.
When administration listens to and follows the recommendations of classified, academic, and student senate.
The Dean needs to have a open communications and talk to classified employee Before making decisions that
directly impact students and classified staff. Classified employees spend the most time with students every day,
we know what things can be improve for students and what things do not work.
Faculty need to be given enough time to participate in decision making on matters that matter to them and to the
college; I feel engaged and encouraged when I am given that time. I also feel engaged when I am asked for my
input on matters that relate to my take on issues, as a faculty member. I feel overlooked when such matters are
decided over the summer when there is little or no direct faculty input in such decision making.
issues that mean something to me or my students and pertain to my academic area
My work assignment conflicts with the hours of most committees. I start lecture at 1p so a 12p-1p mtg is not
workable. I teach off campus on Fri & so many mtgs are on Fri afternoon.
Committee activities and communication, curriculum development, working in teams with faculty across campus
It's hard for me to say what things make me feel engaged and encouraged to participate in college decision
making. Most of the time, I teach classes at UC Davis which are co-coordinated by Sacramento City College and
UC Davis, so I'm rarely on the SCC campus. This keeps me from being exposed to SCC culture and engagement
and makes it hard for me to participate in decision making because I have to go out of my way to go to SCC. This
is unfortunate, but not the fault of SCC or anyone at SCC.
Attendance and participation in division meetings and curriculum discussions within those meetings
10
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
To be honest, not much. I participate actively in my department and in my division, and I have -- and do -- serve
on standing committees, but I feel that a lot of decision making is done without input of faculty and staff.
I have made repeated recommendations about changing processes that occur every semester (such as class
scheduling) to automate and improve the process. I have spoken to the Dean, and to Mary Turner about multiple
other ideas for improvement. Each time, my suggestion/requests are brushed off.
Administrators:
(1) really listen to the problem. SHUT your mouth and LISTEN.
(2) don't be such a smart ASS on your response comments to Faculty when we make suggestions for
improvement. Most of the responses are extremely caustic, sarcastic, demeaning and just plain RUDE.
Administrator - you're not quite as smart as you THINK you are. I've worked in the professional environment for
over 18 years before coming to SCC. Most of the Administrators at SCC are absurdly smarmy, rude, know-it-all's .
The lack of professionalism is ridiculous. This applies especially to the Dean, and many of the AVP's. I am
embarrassed to say that I work at SCC. I am fed up with being insulted with their responses.
I would feel engaged if the administrators asked for, consulted with, and took regards to classified input on things
that affect their work areas and especially student services.
A clear goal, administrative support, administrative understanding of the time involved - faculty time commitments
to students/classroom improvements/department vs. the engagement level desired in these broader activities.
a sense of feeling welcome and appreciated, which doesn't happen very often.
Classified senate
Participation in presentations where questions are encouraged.
Surveys provide anonymous input, which can be helpful for some.
Working directly with students; working across campus constituencies on CIT; working with campus police and the
Discipline Officer on problem solving; working directly with the faculty on faculty/student concerns and on ADA
issues
Being on several standing committees such as curriculum, learning resources, safety, staff development, senior
leadership team.
Curriculum.
Academic senate, surveys, committees
Department conversations, committee work, and communicating information to students so they can be involved if
they choose.
Ongoing invitations for input as well as acknowledgment of input. Oftentimes when reports are shared among SS,
there seems to be "one" program that receives kudos over the rest, although at meetings and submission of
reports all departments and programs provide valuable input.
Committees and Senate
hiring, curriculum committee, meeting with administratiors
obligation, guilt
The Flex Week activities, plus the tenure-track process. I also appreciate the communications from various
committees and the academic senate; there are many opportunities to participate which I really appreciate.
None, most of my engagement comes from self initiate my participation. I do not feel that the college encourages
participation in shared governance, especially administration.
Requests from management, unit planning process, shared governance committees, attendance in meetings
None actually. I feel like our processes are too slow to implement change in an effective manor.
Administration respecting the opinion of faculty-which it does not feel like they respect or value our opinion.
For managers, there are many committees that encourage participation and engagement, but the issue in my
minds is more about the balance between our daily workload and the time we need to engage in an effective and
creative way in all these activities.
Being allowed to attend SD events, convocation, retreat, conferences, etc. Being on the Senate or Campus
Standing Committee.
Within my department and to some extent my division there is real shared decision making. Outside of my division
campus governance organizations such as standing committees and especially executive council, while giving the
appearance of shared decision making, actually act more to isolate administration and their decision making
processes from the faculty.
Budget and Funding Priorities
11
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
when we make a unit plan and its activities get funded. When my dept and dean encourage me to share and take
part in committees.
We have all these decision making groups, but many decisions here seem made by administration and imposed,
not part of any shared governance or broader decision-making group.
Department Chairs council, department meetings, not much, actually
Participating on committees allows for communication and input regarding the current issues at the college.
Knowing that shared governance is truly shared.
Academic Senate
when my office team wants to be involved as well. Unfortunately, that is not the case. As a result it looks like I am
overcompensating and this creates an air of resentment due to my participating on committees.
Being asked for impute; being asked to participate
I feel engaged when I have time to participate in discussions about services, and then I am able to see my input
translated into part of the outcome. Engagement killer is helping move a long-term committee project to
completion, including conversations with all constituencies, and then seeing it die when an office under the
president fails to implement the solution.
The sense that my concerns are actually heard.
Being chair of a committee on campus
Being kept in the know, thru boss or area meetings. Being sought for input. Input welcome. A process would be
nice. While I am involved in the unit planning process for one of my areas, the main area has NEVER included me
in the process, and I am the area supervisor.
Timely "big picture" information when something is starting, not minutiae once it's all been developed and decided
on. I wish there was a webpage that was a one-stop place to see the initiatives going on at the college and
division level.
ADVANCED notice of activities or meetings. Formal communication (in debriefing meeting for HSI, for example)
communicating process and eventually outcome.
Timely responses from the president and other administrators, a more "let's make this happen" attitude and less
"yeah, but..."
I would feel more willing to participate if I felt the shared governance process worked.
Participation on committees, invitations to participate in planning student events from full time faculty, department
chair scheduling meetings so I can attend.
When I see the comments/suggestions of my committee put into place.
Unit planning, regular department meetings, convocation activities (especially the last couple of convocations with
activities aimed at increasing student success),
1) Meetings that do not occur on Friday, one of my busiest days on the job,and 2) the promise of food at the
decision-making meetings :)
There has been, until recently, a culture of interaction and communication when it comes to decision-making. It's
this tradition that encourages me. I find it interesting that there is no dialog box here that asks why I feel
disengaged and discouraged. Why is that?
My dean's support and flexibility with letting me out of the office. Serving on committees that value each member's
opinion equally. Being individually asked to participate somewhere.
I do not feel engaged nor encouraged to participate. There must be "local" support, not just high level Administrator
support.
shared governance committees. the unit planning process and program plan reviews.
things that have a clear and achievable outcomes
12
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
I would love to have a "high" sense of engagement, but my workload does not allow it. Staff members do not
receive release time or incentives for participation like faculty do and that is an issue when it comes to
participating. It is frustrating to have to work outside of my hours to participate, not because my manager does not
support me, but because we are understaffed and my workload is continuously growing.
When managers or members of other constituencies personally ask for my feedback, perspective, or participation.
Recently, I was given the best survey from the BSI committee that I had ever received here at SCC about campus
resources. The questions were simple: Name Open resources that you know about. Name Hidden resources that
you may have heard of, but know little about. Name Secret resources that you may know of that you believe
students don't know about. And the best: Dreams or Needed resources that You believe are needed. Being able
to share our answers created more opportunity for ideas and information gathering.
Also, I would like to distinguish that there is a difference between college decision making and area decision
making. I believe that the areas should gather more feedback and information prior to making top-down decisions
that affect staff and faculty. A representative sample would be appropriate. If the questions were to be related to
area and departmental engagement, my scores would be lower.
At this point in my life I am not real interested in college decision making, but choose to put my energy into the
students I teach and the colleagues around me who are interested in the same. I am often told I am a heretic
because I put student learning over the needs of the institution.
Staff development activities
We need an administration that listens, understands, and explains. I don't feel we have this at the moment.
What would make me feel encouraged is some authority for the front-line people to make decisions about how best
to teach. The SSS initiative was mandated from the top down and is contrary to student success in many of its
requirements.
Managers and others receiving my input with interest rather than as an obligation.
enteractions betweem all levels of staff.
as a part-time faculty member, it's difficult to serve on committees because a)I am not compensated for my time
and b)I teach at two colleges and spend driving hither and yon
When I am consulted, as a content expert, about decisions relevant and immediate to my area.
NONE
Not much. As classified, our opinions aren't very valued. Faculty don't really respect us and it doesn't seem to
occur to them that classified or adjunct might have valuable insights or contributions.
None that I can think of.
Good decision of moving forward.
Shared projects, discussions of common interests/concerns, being able to assist with activities, interactions that
focus on student success
13
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
College communication
EFFECTIVENESS OF COMMUNICATION
The most common answer to items related to the effectiveness of communication was “agree”. SCC employees
feel knowledgeable about the effectiveness of college communication. Relatively few respondents answered
“Don’t know” to these items.
Please indicate your agreement/disagreement with each of the following statements.
2014 Survey
College communication processes share
information effectively across the college.
Information about major college processes is
readily available to me.
Information about the work of my division is
readily available to me.
Overall, the college is moving in the right
direction with respect to campus climate and
communication.
My senate or representative council has
sufficient opportunities to communicate about
college decisions.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Don't
Know
Response
Count
9
73
58
55
22
5
222
19
82
57
37
18
9
222
41
93
38
32
13
5
222
13
73
63
42
20
10
221
20
84
67
15
8
27
221
skipped question
31
Overall, SCC employees rate college communication as fairly effective. However, the percent strongly agreeing
or agreeing is lower than in the 2011 survey. This is especially noticeable in the responses of the classified
staff, where all items declined by more than 10 percentage points. In the 2011 survey, over half of respondents
agreed or strong agreed with each of the items related to the effectiveness of college communication. In the
2014 survey this was not the case.
Effective college communication 2014 Survey: Percent of “strongly agree” or “agree” responses.
(Changes of 10 or more percentage points from 2011 to 2014 are noted by bold italics)
Faculty
Classified staff
Administrator
College communication processes share information effectively across the college.
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
43%
36%
49%
33%
90%
73%
59%
43%
100%
87%
77%
43%
100%
100%
Information about major college processes is readily available to me.
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
49%
42%
Information about the work of my division is readily available to me.
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
62%
67%
Overall, the college is moving in the right direction with respect to campus climate and communication.
2011 Survey
2014 Survey
48%
38%
64%
33%
100%
71%
My senate or representative council has sufficient opportunities to communicate about college decisions.
2011 Survey
2014 Survey.
57%.
48%
54%
40%
90%
71%
14
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
COMMUNICATION VENUES:
Email is the most common means of learning about the college. Meetings are also a common communication
venue. There were some differences between groups with administrators relying on meetings for
communication more than the other groups
Most common communication venues 2014 survey
College policies and procedures
College events
Major colleges decisions
College planning processes
The work of the respondent’s council or senate
The work of the respondent’s division
Faculty
Email
Email
Email
Meetings
Email
Meetings
The work of the respondent’s department
Personnel changes
External events affecting the college
Meetings
Email
Email
Classified Staff
Email
Email
Email
Email
Email
Email/Meetings/
Conversations
Meetings
Email
Email
Administrator
Meetings
Email
Meetings
Meetings
Meetings
Meetings
Meetings
Email
Email
How do you usually learn about the following topics? Mark all choices that apply.
2014 Survey Results
College policies and procedures
Email
Meetings
Conversations
Dean/VP
Campus website
City Chronicles
Other
None
College events
Email
Meetings
Conversations
Dean/VP
Campus website
City Chronicles
Other
None
Major college decisions
Email
Meetings
Conversations
Dean/VP
Campus website
City Chronicles
Other
None
Faculty
Classified staff
Administrator
Total
78
60
45
47
27
4
4
1
266
60
29
28
12
14
3
4
2
152
13
14
10
9
7
3
1
0
57
475
100
16
25
7
34
31
6
0
219
71
13
17
5
13
16
4
1
140
12
8
9
6
10
8
0
0
53
412
70
48
42
45
9
5
4
7
230
46
20
22
16
3
3
3
9
122
9
13
7
9
1
1
1
0
41
393
College planning processes
15
Communication and Governance Survey
Email
Meetings
Conversations
Dean/VP
Campus website
City Chronicles
Other
None
Fall 2014
60
62
41
41
10
0
5
8
227
The work of your council or senate
Email
81
Meetings
47
Conversations
40
Dean/VP
2
Campus website
4
City Chronicles
1
Other
2
None
3
180
The work of your division
Email
57
Meetings
66
Conversations
61
Dean/VP
52
Campus website
2
City Chronicles
0
Other
1
None
6
245
The work of your department
Email
61
Meetings
84
Conversations
77
Dean/VP
17
Campus website
3
City Chronicles
1
Other
3
None
2
248
Personnel changes
Email
78
Meetings
19
Conversations
44
Dean/VP
21
Campus website
3
City Chronicles
2
Other
1
None
10
178
External events affecting the college
Email
64
Meetings
31
40
27
14
12
4
0
4
15
116
9
14
12
10
6
1
0
0
52
395
62
24
18
1
1
1
0
5
112
9
13
8
4
0
0
1
0
35
327
41
41
41
31
1
0
2
9
166
11
13
12
7
3
0
2
0
48
459
40
46
47
23
1
0
2
7
166
9
11
10
6
2
0
1
0
39
453
49
19
35
16
2
2
2
7
132
13
11
9
7
0
0
1
0
41
351
39
7
11
10
16
Communication and Governance Survey
Conversations
Dean/VP
Campus website
City Chronicles
Other
None
Fall 2014
35
20
12
8
14
19
203
19
10
4
5
14
15
113
10
9
1
4
5
1
51
answered question
skipped question
367
197
26
Do you feel that information sharing at SCC is effective? What works and what doesn't?
SCC is not effective on sharing information. Email is about the best way to communicate with everyone.
We faculty are commonly asked to relay information to students during class time. In theory this is a
reasonable request, but if I actually took the time to share all (or even half) of the requested information
with my students during class time, I would not be able to get through my course material. We are simply
asked to relay too much information during class time.
Most communication is by email. At times, so much information is passed on by email that it is
overwhelming, and gets "lost' if I have no time when I receive the email to act.
Yes, email communication and meeting are the normal mode of communication
No. The faculty is often uninformed regarding decisions that are made by administrative officers.
No. It seems hit or miss as far as what information is shared and who receives it. Too much is done via
email--we are overloaded with individual messages.
I think that SCC has made tremendous efforts to improve communication to the extent that we are over
saturated with information. The volume of emails are extreme and all begin to blur together and cause a
feeling of overload.
Yes. Email is probably the most effective method of communication, but when it is overused, people are
overwhelmed with too many emails and then it becomes ineffective because they don't read all the emails.
As an adjunct I seem to have little chance for input at any level.
No, not effective enough. Using emails and meetings are helpful. Our dean does not meet with us so, in
our area, we hear about campus information/opportunities (decisions, request for input, discussions) from
others.
Classified are at the bottom and we are not really important.
Email is often used and as a result is a monster incapable of being managed in the course of a day. It's
hard to remember sometimes who needs to be included in a conversation.
What doesn't work is being informed AFTER the decision has been made. Not being included does not
work, and you cant call that shared governance.
It would work much better if constituent representative took their role as communicators more to heart!
This is much of the breakdown occurs. People don't report back to their constituent groups in an effective
manner.
I'm new this semester and just figuring things out.
We are told when things have already happened. Only a small group of insiders make the decisions.
If one has a desire to be informed, the information is available
No, Communication is not always shared in a timely manner. Not everyone reads their email.
We get too much email.
E-mail works very well.
No. Information sharing is usually more effective when it involves two way communication that occurs
prior to making a decision.
No What works is more conversation between the supervisor /Classified Staff and the Dean
17
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
It is good.
It depends on the area where you work.Some managers are more effective in disseminating information
than others.
Not sure. Don't really see it in use in the ways you are looking for.
I think there's a good-faith effort happening, but the organization is too large, with too many overlapping
(and sometimes contradictory) goals, initiatives, planning processes, reports, etc. Honestly, I think the
expectation for clarity across the college is unrealistic.
Yes. I think the key is to use a layered approach when disseminating information
Email is so time consuming
No. We rarely hear about changes in policies and procedures except to be told we have done things
incorrectly and that there is a new form. Updates from the district and departments that change policies
would be helpful- and e-mail would be great as would the website.
E-mail and sharing of information as it becomes available works well.
No, It could be better.
No. The President does not foster an environment of sharing. She doesn't model the sharing of
information; she leaves key players (of all levels) out of conversations; she seems completely checked
out.
What works -- right now, not much.
no
I think there is the perception (perhaps not even true) that decisions are made without substantial input
from faculty and staff--or that such input isn't valued or taken seriously.
Yes!
Sharing information to the rest of the campus community could improve. Topics shared at meetings are
seldom shared.
Communication relies on the rumor mill at Sacramernto City College. Or one lone workshop held at 9am
on Monday. if you don't attend, then you are out of luck. That is, even if you work Saturdays and are not
even on campus on Monday, or nights and not on campus.
Not all employees are viewed as needing to know information
No. Email seems to be somewhat ineffective because of the volume of emails many people receive.
Yes
It seems like for most interested folks, in most instances information is readily available. I think a more
common problem is information overload, combined with a heavy workload. It is very difficult to give the
time and attention needed to important campus issues after the fifth week of the semester when
instructional work intensifies (ie reading and grading student papers/exams and the like).
Emails work and the dissemination of information through governance structures works well.
At times information sharing is effective at SCC. It depends on the manager who is leading the effort, the
program, or the initiative and the time period. If changes happen over the summer term then information is
not shared as widely. Some managers are more diligent about sharing updates and changes that they
learn in their managers meetings with the staff who report to them. Some do not. Some managers and
supervisors solicit feedback from the staff in their areas and departments and take that feedback back to
their deans, VPs, etc. Some do not. The information is spotty and not happening on a consistent basis.
current processes work well
Yes. I prefer email communication.
No. Many administrators treat faculty like the enemy.
Yes and no. My department shares information effectively, primarily through meetings and e-mail.
However, I think information-sharing hits a wall at the level of administration. We don't often get timely
communication from our division dean, and there are key informational points that don't get
communicated clearly from upper administration. For example, I don't think our accreditation timelines
were communicated clearly, and because of that, my writing group is very behind on that process. There
have been many concerns about shared governance, and a lot of those concerns involve the lack of
transparency and timeliness in communication.
I am sure a lot of information is on the college website, but I really don't know where to look sometimes. I
often find broken links.
18
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Effective for full-time faculty if they have the time to pay attention
Not sure it is effective for part-time faculty
some just is window-dressing and wastes time EX; a committee that works hard and long to develop
something is told no, not feasible after the work is done-why not just provide the parameters (budget,
materials, personnel) first so that can be part of the development?
Likely it is as good as it can be. But as a faculty member, it is inordinately difficult to stay abreast of the
communication feed. We are quite busy with just being available to students writing lectures, grading,
holding office hours that it is difficult to stay abreast of all the news that affects us.
yes
It isn't as effective as it could be. Information and questions are sent out through email and people don't
respond. Was the information received?
Information put on signs and posters (usually about events) are often ignored. Electronic message
boards would probably grab more attention.
Yes. Standard set-time meetings with interactive agandas work well. Information affecting faculty
activities from the District offen occurs after the decisions have been made.
I feel I am informed about a lot of events and decisions however, it is harder to gauge how much is left out
since, by definition, it is information I am not receiving.
Neutral on that. I think both the people sharing info and those consuming it have issues. I often hear
people complain about not knowing about something that we've received numerous emails about.
Whether it's they don't have time to read their email or they just don't care is debatable.
Not really. I think that people whose job depends on making sure sharing information is performed make
sure information is shared, but its not always effectively shared. Perhaps there can be a way for Outlook
to automatically divide communications into "college concerns" "department concerns" "student concerns"
"individual concerns," or some such division that makes logical sense. It might be good to have some
more order to the chaos of emails that come in daily. Also, I think that there are some deans/admin that
are very good at communicating and communicating effectively, and then there are others that are just
plain lousy at it. One way to improve effective communication would be to make sure everyone who needs
to communicate effectively is doing so. At the same time, the same can be said of faculty -- many faculty
are indeed engaged, but many others are not. Admin and Faculty need to be encouraged to communicate
more and more effectively in a broader sense; also, more interpersonal relationships need to be forged
across campus since these are the best in ensuring respect and communication occurs regularly and
consistently; we need to throw some parties around here, some serious celebration events -- and not
celebration events around some person or visitor; I mean we need to have a gala or something,
something huge that everyone can get excited about. People love their jobs at SCC (I know I do) but
people are starting to lose the niceties, lose the connectedness and people are overrun with the minutia of
data gathering and processing. Education is not about data gathering and processing, no matter how
much the legislature would like this to be so.
Email is a workable way to get info to everyone. Administration makes decisions over the summer when
may faculty are not working & this not a good situation. It feels like a cheat to read about a decision made
over the summer & know faculty had little input.
Yes I think it is effective. In my department sometimes it feels the decision is made and then I hear about
it.
I get a lot of emails keeping me apprised of things, and I look over each email, so I do have a sense of
what is going on at SCC. I think that works pretty well. Otherwise, my exposure to information at SCC is
limited since I spend little time on campus.
Better communication from senate would be appreciated, perhaps through email or the department
meetings.
As you can see above, nearly everything I learn, I learn from e-mail. The problem with this is that I -- and
my colleagues -- receive a tremendous amount of e-mail every day (on occasion, I receive over 50 e-mails
a day, sometimes more), and honestly, it's difficult to wade through it all. I admit, I don't read all of it,
simply because it's time-consuming, and I have a lot of other messages --from students, my Dean, and my
department colleagues -- that need my attention first.
Email is probably best method.
The rumor mill and "who you know" is used all the time.
Knowledge of major college decisions - are you kidding?
19
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Information is easily shared but not easily prioritized in my email inbox. Frequently, email is appropriate
for sharing info but not for responding to or acting on that info, leading to no response.
Information sharing in the governance process has always been a major problem at SCC. Within the
Rodda North bubble decision making occurs with little substantive understanding of the thinking of faculty
about the work of their departments. Most of the campus governance processes (division deans, standing
committees, executive council) act to filter out direct daily information sharing between the faculty the
administration
not too much. your concerns are requested, and expressed, but not considered in final decisions.
The sharing of information in the college can be described as effective, but when the shared information
points one way and management goes a different, what’s the point in sharing?
Emails work well, but only if people READ their emails.
Email can be overlooked due to the number of emails received.
Flyers may be effective as reminders -- yet wasteful of resources.
What works is the will/intent to share information. What sometimes doesn't work is the pace of life here
on campus that sometimes doesn't allow opportunity to adequately share information.
Information sharing is a bit lop-sided. Faculty open up their meetings to managers, but managers do not
open their meetings to faculty.
Yes it is usually effective through participation on standing committees and discussions with faculty and
division Dean.
no
Information overload continues to be a challenge. I think that many folks try to communicate but
information is often lost the noise of daily responsibilities. There are some cases in which administration
can better communicate processes and decision making to other staff (for example, hiring decisions).
Could be improved. Our division dean (SAH) rarely has meetings of faculty or dept. chairs. This should
be done to develop interaction among members and get information out.
Some vital information seems to be kept very mysterious and secretive, such as the Pay it Forward
emergency assistance for students. Permanent counselors are the only ones who can make a formal
recommendation for a student to be considered for assistance. Adjunct Counselors are often left out of
the loop! It appears as of the rest of the college campus is not aware of this service.
There is none because it does not come from the top two admin. It is barely effective.
It is ok intra-departmentally and small focus work groups (subcommittees). Interdepartmentally is more of
a challenge
Emails are overused
A specific portion of website could be tapped specifically for internal employee messages and another for
events outside the campus that affect our campus
no
The Deans do not send info to us effectively, too many emails for us to read, too many surveys designed
to look like we are communicating
The new screens in hallways like RHN are a joke--a very ineffective way to communicate. I would like to
see more administrators visiting dept. meetings for conversations.
I believe that normally, conversations work better than email, as so many people are inundated. However,
for more universal messages, email is still effective. In general I do believe that info sharing is effective at
SCC.
No it is not effective, many groups are left out of the loop.
Some information sharing feels pro forma and technical -- just enough to pass the communication test but
not enough to actually involve people beyond "listening" or "voicing." Timing is also a factor -- sometimes
information is shared after key decisions have been made -- reporting back rather than soliciting
engagement in planning, or inviting engagement on how to decorate the house after the house has been
designed.
Yes. Email is very effective.
Too many emails from counseling, tutoring, BSI, DPPS, Equity etc,.
No. There is a clear division between faculty and administration. Administrators often dominate decisions.
20
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
At one level, there is so much information flowing that we become overwhelmed by it. At another level,
the information flow from the constituency reps in standing committees to their respective constituents
does not flow well.
No because it is not consistent. When provided the time, I can search for the information and most times
find it.
Emails from President-work
SCC Exchange from anyone-do not work
No, we do not share information well. Most of the time, we are lucky to hear about events in a timely
manner. The dean does not share well.
Somewhat effective, but I still don't really have a clear understanding of what is happening with planning,
budget and accreditation in real time. PRIE does an excellent job on timelines, interactions for unit plans,
etc., but what happens after unit plans are submitted and how this info is used is much less clear. Email
has helped a lot, but I think more face to face with managers would help bridge some gaps.
somewhat
Obviously e-mail works, although sometimes excessive. Would be nice to consolidate into website and
blogs.
No. I find out more about people who have died than I do about issues, policies and positions.
Information sharing is good, when those that have the information desire to share it.
Info sharing is effective-- the school website contains the majority if information one may need to become
more informed. If all else fails ask--it is easy to approach the admin. to get answers.
No. Too many emails and not enough conversations.
Committee members do not share agenda items to their fellow division members.
Email works for me, though it bothers many people. I find it more bothersome to check multiple places for
messages and college information.
Email doesn't work. There are too many emails sent, and no way to keep the collective information in a
manner that is easily referenced.
If you are able to attend the few meetings that are scheduled to disseminate information about, for
example, administrative processes, this is a good format.
I think emails are effective if read.
Yes and no. there are specific things that can be shared amongst the colleagues and others that need not
be expressed until an outcome has been rendered.
I feel a lot of very important information is not shared, and short notice for meetings or debriefings
The dean as conduit between faculty and admin is an inconsistent and subjective process. If you've got a
good dean, then you get info and inclusion. If not, you learn about things via email and running into
people.
Yes
I feel more like I'm notified from time to time about issues. I guess you can call that "sharing" but it pales in
comparison to the old days when decisions were truly shared. If you're asking me if I'm "notified"
effectively, I would say yes, pretty much. If you're wondering about my dissatisfaction in my workplace, it's
because I feel that shared governance is a rubber stamp process and the needs of the majority are not
being met because of the egos of a few administrators. It is an ineffective way to run an educational
institution if you want to keep your good professors and maintain solid enrollment.
I think it works as well as can be expected in a bureaucracy made of so many employees (many of whom
are intentionally uninvolved or uninformed). I think people don't always realize that while their opinion
may be listened to, that's not a guarantee that their advised course of action is what will actually end up
happening (for whatever reason); hence, a good portion of the complaining. As a classified staff member,
this latest round of contract negotiations were miserable; I felt like both DO/administration and LRCEA
were treating us like sheep. Given that we are professionals, many of whom are college-educated, that
was offensive. I suspect that contract negotiations had a lot to do with how classified staff in general were
perceiving campus climate last semester. It doesn't help when we find out later that managers get a
COLA, but we don't (but that's a DO thing, not an SCC thing).
21
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
We need to do a better job at providing context to issues on campus. Minutes from meeting don't always
provide the level of the detail that is required to comprehend the issue. Short abstracts, or executive
overviews, will help the rank and file faculty member consume complex issues.
Placing everything online will allow everyone to access everything from an internet enabled
computer/tablet/phone.
Information sharing is inefficient because important information comes from so many different areas. A
brief email from my Senate representative is helpful. The fact that no one sends out an email that recaps
department and division meetings does not work, since often times my teaching schedule does not permit
me to attend (and I am not paid for attending as an adjunct). The assumption seems to be if you want
information, you need to take the initiative for chasing it down.
No. There seems to be a lack of consistency in the messages received from one department to the next
and one division to another.
not always effective. After all these years, I've learned to negotiate where to go to get the information I
need and email is probably the most common access point that I use for information, but I'm never sure
what I've missed.
Yes it works but there is a general feeling that sometimes the administration "over rules" the suggestions
of the committees, faculty, etc...
Pretty good overall. faculty have busy lives and often don't attend meetings, so information sharing is
imperfect. And the staff is stretched quite a bit, so they have a hard time getting to meetings.
Information sharing is highly ineffective. Decisions are being made without due diligence, in regards to
how it will affect instruction and the use of resources. A few examples include the purchase of ineffective
copy machines, abrupt changes in classified positions available to instructional divisions (and the return of
these positions). As a faculty member, I have no confidence that administrators know what I need, and
what I don't need.
No. I don't feel like there is a consistent line of communication across all areas. It seems that managers
will use whatever method they are most comfortable with. As support staff, this means that we have to be
on the look out for policy changes which makes our jobs completely inefficient and time consuming!
Sometimes we don't find out about changes until after we've submitted paperwork and we've gotten a slap
on the hand for not doing it correctly. The methods of top-down communication are not working. Also
interdepartmental communication about policies is not appropriately determining upper managements
decisions. Some higher level managers want things a certain way just because they want them that way.
It has nothing to do with following policies. Having to anxiously submit documents wondering if they are
going to get returned because of a manager's mood is very frustrating and time consuming. Not to
mention these are the types of interactions that are contributing to low morale.
What Would work would be if all players were to get together at a table and discuss the most efficient
ways to process paperwork starting from the bottom-up. Meaning that every stage of the process would
get cataloged. Departments and divisions can create their own information sheets at the lowest level, but
it would be better if everyone had the same information and followed the same process.
Emails are great. I like the text-only type, without distracting graphics.
In formation from my supervisor is great, but from my dean about the division is less than marginal. She
does not encourage connectivity among the units. Talk about silos.
Many major college decisions seem to happen without input from all constituencies. We often here the
decision without rationale, explanation or context. The feeling is (correct or not) that constituency input
was not important.
No. Not enough communication all around!
I feel that we have the opportunity to share, but it is not always counted in the decision-making process.
No. What works are directives (demands) from the district that impact enrollment management. These are
communicated often and strongly although constantly changing and at the whims of the LAO and
legislature.
Information sharing is not effective.
no
Information moves fairly slowly. Often people don't bother to read the information that is being distributed.
yes. I feel like the communication level is high because of email. and word of mouth doesnt always work.
22
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
by email only
Not entirely. Managers do not always forward information in a timely manner to their employees. It is
helpful when information is shared at required meetings.
It seems that is a lack of inclusion when Admin is making decisions about Faculty roles/responsibilities.
No, it's not. There is often no communication amongst divisions/departments about processes or changes
to processes. It would help us to better serve students if we were able to communicate better across
divisions/departments about new laws, procedures, services, etc. that affect students.
50% EFFECTIVE
MEETINGS AND CONVERSATIONS DON'T WORK FOR PEOPLE THAT CANNOT HEAR.
IT IS DIFFICULT TO FIND INFORMATION ON THE NEW WEBSITE SO I DO NOT USE IT AT ALL.
Too many emails to all - usually not read by most recipients.
I think email some of the time.
Do you have any suggestions to improve college communication?
- Information about events/programs/resources/etc. should be relayed directly to students via some sort
of 'clearing house' (email?), rather than scattershot via class time. For example, information could be
categorized (events vs. scholarships, for example) so that students could effectively gain access to the
most relevant information to them, and easily filter out non-essential information.
Occasional visits to the department, for example during department meetings, by administrators would
help me keep abreast of important college decisions, planning, and policies.
More transparency and clarity is very much needed.
Perhaps collect all of the necessary bits of information into a weekly or monthly emailed newsletter (like
city Chronicles) with very short blurbs or even just a list of headlines with links to further information.
I wish I did.
Have all groups actually working together to reach decsions.
Active involve adjuncts by asking for their input before decisions are finalized.
Create a flow chart of how information should flow to faculty and staff. Maybe this will create some
accountability. Schedule department meetings well in advance. Share agendas as soon as possible and
allow for input.
A lot of information is available to the college community, but not everyone takes the time to access it.
not really
Create a flow chart of questions intended to determine if all stakeholders have been included in the loop.
If you want to talk of change, then you are talking about a new administration. It didn't always used to be
the way it is now, but the only way I see it changing is to get new management. (I don't see that
happening.)
More frequent written updates about critical or key college issues. Use hard copy mail for more important
information. Repeat information in multiple venues to reinforce the important messages.
I get many emails about events at school and in the district, but, as an adjunct, I don't know which are
important or relevant to me.
Eliminate several layers of bureaucracy. Start with term limits for committee tri-chairs. No tri-chairs from
the department that the committee is supposed to regulate. Work on true participatory governance.
It would be nice to be in a place where communications were monthly prior to an event occurring so that
you could plan ahead rather than calendaring something at the last minute
More opportunities to meet with the President and provide feedback and input on college-wide decisions.
See my response to question 3.
More conversation between classified staff and the Dean
Vary the meeting times, especially staff development opportunities as some departments are unable to
release staff during the usually scheduled lunch time meetings/training.
It would be great to have a dean that communicated effectively.
Reduce it. Hash out the goalsetting and planning at the administrative level, and send out targeted,
relevant information only, from a single source.
23
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Have more opportunity to have real open dialogue discussions that are important to your area. It appears
at times that there are many conversations that go on without key players involved. By the time the
information gets relayed to the appropriate people, or people that are actually doing the work the
information gets misconstrued. To many isolated conversations and to many layers of isolated
conservations going on doesn't help with relaying accurate information and also leads to mistrust.
No
Email is most widely used but that doesn't mean that I completely understand the so called end result, it's
difficult to follow email from the start to the finished result.
Yes- Tell us through e-mail and meetings with the divisions when there are changes, what is happening
at the top level etc.
More sharing of information via e-mail and meetings.
No.
Share all important campus happenings in multiple ways (e-mail, website (maybe a "what's new" area),
video, through standing committees, at all senates, etc.) and let people know what you want to have
shared.
Also encourage everyone on standing committees to share back with their respective units.
allow faculty to have a say in decision making
Perhaps managers meetings could include a standard item called "What do faculty and staff need to
know about?"--or something like that. Maybe Academic Senate, Classified Senate, DCC, and other
meetings could include "What do we want to know more about?"
Talking & Listening is required for Communication to be effective; Management needs to actually listen
BEFORE making/implementing changes.
Management should hold a meeting with their staff and communicate pertinent information.
First,. some kind of actual communication structure should be made. None exists currently. The student
side has gotten load better in the last 5 years with the use of the PR staff. But internal communication is
absolutely horrible. Example: I learn of changes to student hiring paperwork by having my paperwork
denied. That is not a good way of communicating changes in hiring processes or of newly updated
paperwork issuance.
New management in some departments
Add communication goals to programs plans with specific ways to measure the success.
Not at this time
I would like to see the administrators out and about on campus more, talking with staff, and filling us in on
the happenings.
Supervisors and managers should solicit for feedback from those employees who report to them. The
feedback could be about anything and everything that is happening at SCC, new programs and
processes, and the progress or outcomes of the older, current or "seasoned" programs. When
supervisors and managers do collect the feedback to take back to the "higher-ups" they should not
sensor that feedback, they should report back the raw and honest feedback, not filtered or watered down
to suit the supervisor/manager's taste and comfort.
especially lacking is information about external events that occur in evenings and weekends - perhaps a
webpage devoted to this, there is a calendar, but issues like parking and congestion at entrances would
be helpful to know ahead of time, so a special calendar for this would help.
Yes, treat faculty like professionals.
I think transparency and visibility on the part of upper administration needs to improve significantly.
Emails that are clearly written and marked with "High Importance" help me. I also think we can better use
our existing media, such as City Chronicles and our college website, to communicate information. As
much as I dislike meetings, a division meeting once a semester might be a helpful way to disseminate
information. At the very least, a monthly e-mail from our division dean with a summary of important
information could be helpful as well.
I am an adjunct so it is difficult to be included in the "loop" with our work load and very limited time we are
here.
24
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Make sure flex workshops are listed in the online calendar of events. Major college decisions should be
communicated in other ways besides e-mail. Maybe department chairs should be asked to share the
information during dept. meetings.
Form more connections, have more conversations, widen personal interest in more things
more transparency about pressures on managers that need to be taken into account; no hidden agendas;
less PC and more straightforwardness
Not at this time.
More face to face communication
More time between classes so that conversations can take place
No.
-Don't delay spreading the word. We seem to get info after everyone knows about it.
-Be selective about what goes out as a campus-wide email. We get a lot of email.
Better email sorting system; honest evaluation of dean and admin communication abilities that allows for
improvements to be made (same with faculty); more interpersonal relationships forged; a gala.
Save the big decisions for the 10 month work year.
no
Not really. I think that, in general, I've been kept abreast of the goings on. It's up to me whether I read
every committee minutes document I am sent and how actively I participate in committees, and that's fair.
Perhaps send out some sort of bulletin to Deans -- maybe a couple of times a month -- that Deans can
then forward on to departments/divisions. I always read e-mails from my Dean, and I imagine the same
is true for most of my colleagues. Also: perhaps use some time at Convocation to cover major items that
we need to know OR have representatives from management come to speak at Division/Department
meetings to update us on current topics.
1. Use honesty and integrity in decision making.
2. Deans - stop acting like you "own" the division! It is not yours, you are only placed there to
FACILITATE instruction. Contrary to your expressed belief, the faculty are not the ENEMY. If the college
doesn't have faculty, we don't need YOU. Stop treating us as children to be told what they must do. Our
division would probably run a whole lot smoother WITHOUT you.
3. Ask and consult with us BEFORE making major decisions that affect our departments.
4. Stop insulting adjunct faculty! Most of them are teaching because they love to teach, love the students,
and are busy, working professionals in their real life. Figure out the best way to communicate with them,
and stop getting pissed off when they don't/can't respond as fast as you think they should to your
emails(!) The Dean has been so obnoxious and rude for so long, that most of my adjuncts don't want to
hear from the Dean. Kindness and would go a long way to improving communication.
5. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." (Most administrators don't know about this
golden rule.)
6. I get the feeling that the administrators really DON'T GIVE A DAMN what the faculty think.
All information that the college feels is both valuable and requires action should come with identifiers that
allow for saving/calendaring the info and ways to respond (along with types of response needed). A
survey with a link is clear, but not always the most effective way for faculty to respond.
Change the governance process so that it fosters a much more robust dialogue between faculty and
administration about the daily concerns of faculty and the true nature of the learning process. For
example, make the entire Department Chairs Council part of the Executive Council.
how do you change a mind-set whose motto is "it's my way or the highway"?
Encourage managers to use the information that is being shared in meetings
None
Practice. We need to practice.
President of the Academic Senate should have a seat on Dean's Council.
No
no
25
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
There are many centralized places to communicate information but I think having more face to face
communication is invaluable here. Participating in committees and active groups help but I still feel that
there is work that could be done for improvement here.
See above
Be more inclusive of non-permanent employees, i.e., adjunct faculty and temporary classified.
Oftentimes, it is this group who has direct contact with students. Excluding them (knowingly or not) of
crucial information could make a difference in a student's college success.
The top two admin need to start talking and stop going unneeded workshops all the time.
Effectiveness training ("Get things done" model).
Communications training (Suggestions are meant constructively, not personal attacks; and the opposite,
how to structure criticism constructively, not personally)
See above
more updates and emails about decisions of different groups meeting - maybe an update from all
committees
Honesty is good. Don't invent more templates and forms for us to fill out and call it communication
Far too many dept. decisions are made with no participation by management.
More opportunities to increase collaboration across departments and between faculty and staff would
result in more good will, in my opinion.
Hire transparent administrators.
Loosen up control and gatekeeping of processes and there won't be as much guardedness around power
tied to information, and substantive communication will flow.
I don't have time to read multiple emails a day from different offices in student services. I would like to
see one email that encompasses all information that needs to be shared with the students.
Create a plan to do team building exercise between faculty and administration.
More face-to-face rather than e-mail communication is needed. Better use and etiquette when using email.
Close the college twice a year for Convocation but make it a normal work day = mandatory attendance.
Publish a bi annual President's letter from Advancement Office
Make the deans more aware of how shared governance should work.
Convocation used to provide a lot of information, but anymore it seems such a waste of time. We should
work on how to use the flex days hours to better effect. We need real time for collaboration, and it is very
difficult to find, yet those hours at the beginning of the semester are squandered.
less bullying by other goups
Weekly updates from administration via website.
Leadership showing that ideas outside "the bubble" are valued and taken into consideration rather than
ignored in favor of diktats. Having more real meetings that aren't the latest fad like "charettes" or other
nonsense and actually creating established constituencies that communicate regularly AND DIRECTLY
with the high command.
Share information in an open and timely manner.
Keep doing what they are doing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Talk to each other, often!
Sharing info via email meeting etc. would ensure that information is being shared. Campus TV monitors
thruoghout campus with the college president explaining major college decisions or committee chairs
sharing their agenda items
I would like to get more insight into processes at the administrative level. Management reads faculty and
classified minutes, but we aren't privy to discussions in management meetings. Why is this? I'm not
even sure who is in different management committees - Senior Leadership? Executive Council? Where
are they listed? What is their agenda? Where are their minutes? Can we show up at their meetings as
they can at ours?
26
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Don't assume that because something is shared at the top that the information trickles down, especially in
a timely manner. There needs to be a better use of technology, to store information, references, etc. in a
user-friendly manner. This is a big institution that practices communication as though we were a small
organization. We need big system processes.
I think that while meetings are a good thing, they should be supplemented by email. Not everyone can
attend meetings, especially classified who work in the later parts of the day. All meeting minutes and
handouts should be emailed out so that you don't feel like having missed the meeting you are uninformed
about important processes, procedures and other aspects of the college.
Important issues could be given to chairs of committees to share at their meetings.
Gossip is like wildfire. If a hot issue is on the rise and has made its way to the gossip table, send out an
email updating folks that things are being worked out or in process and updates will be made available as
they are resolved.
at least two weeks notice would be helpful. Always follow up with committee information or special
projects with those who were invested, or expressed interest, in said project.
Allow a faculty rep at Dean's Council once a month so we can find out what's going on. The faculty rep
then communicates to the division via an email blast.
Require minutes of all decision-making meetings be posted in one place on the website.
Hire a consultancy that can aid the administrators to be more effective "leaders". Stop calling yourself the
"senior leadership team" (very alienating, top down term) and start listening to, respecting, and seriously
considering the people who are the backbone of this college.
There use to be public information system that announces what's going on. Now since we have the new
phone system it doesn't work. There should be a weekly email of things that are going on campus. When
there are working on campus doing repairs in a certain building they should let the division office know.
I think an example has to be set by the highest levels of administration, starting with the President. If a
specific department or constituency group is going to be effected by something (whether the Community
Colleges Pathway to Law School initiative or a new grant application), representatives of that
department/constituency need to be involved from the get-go to talk about feasibility, etc. Some areas of
upper administration (and DO) are better at that than others.
In a work environment like Sacramento City College, our diverse and distributed work force requires a
communication system that is open, flexible and extensible. I would support the continual integration of
the SCC website in to our core communication system. A web platform, like the website, is a perfect tool
to openly communicate about campus issues. The web governance committee is doing a great job at
shepherding the campus to the new platform but we should look to centralize ALL of our documents in an
open, online web platform. I see, far to often, members of our campus community relying on email
attachments as a method to share documents. In a lot of different areas on campus, I see folks working
off of different versions of the exact same document. This leads to massive confusion and misinformation
on the details of that document. Personally, I think a web service that Evernote would be extremely
useful for a lot planning and communications systems that we are trying to improve. I recognize, first
hand, the limits that FERPA places on our ability to share documents online, but we have to explore new,
online methods of communicating to increase the effectiveness of our communication.
There needs to be a central clearinghouse for information from committees, departments, and division
meetings or other important changes. How about hiring someone to keep up with all of the major
committees and divisions who could send out a monthly or bimonthly summary for faculty? A single place
where important information is available in a brief format with a link to a longer description would be
incredibly helpful. Or possibly a blog?
Nursing always has clinical lab off campus all day Friday. All committee meetings are held on Fridays,
which excludes our participation. Reschedule meetings for other days of the week.
create a standard set of communication suggestions and procedures that people at all levels can follow.
That way people know where to find information.
If our suggestions are being "over ruled" please explain why. It may be there is a very good reason but it
can feel like our voices are not being heard.
I'd strongly recommend more participation in college decisions - especially including more faculty.
Teaching is much more effective if administrators truly understand what faculty experience on a day-today level. It almost seems there is a bubble that insulates administration (especially at the VP level and
up) from what actually happens in the classroom.
27
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Get some focus groups together to discuss this. Not just a survey. Really show people that you want to
change the way the institution communicates and that managers at all levels are willing to participate and
make changes. As a staff member, it is frustrating not to have anyone to communicate on my behalf. My
manager may feel like it would be too political to share a concern and I don't blame them. Therefore, give
the staff an outlet and an ability to make recommendations on improving the process. No more top-down
demands that are based on fear because it truly shows through and makes me lack confidence in our
administration.
SCC does many things well. Some people want to know and follow information and processes, and
some people act like you never told them anything--no matter how many times and ways you tried to
communicate with them. Major changes are still made without discussions with the actual units that are
affected by the changes. Just because a Supervisor or Dean is consulted, it doesn't necessarily mean
that they are including their underlings in any discussions. Many units are only informed when all of the
decisions are already made. That is an oversight that needs to be corrected. The new building is a prime
example of this lack of dissemination of information. I have had no input into the process, although a few
times I have seen blueprints.
Provide rationale for decisions, especially when they are counter to constituency recommendations.
Encourage equal participation among classified, faculty and administrator groups when possible. Reach
across constituencies and make fewer decisions in constituency isolation (academic senate, classified
senate, union, SLT, etc.)
Implement an employee COMMUNICATION page on our website. I would check it daily!
Continue to inform deans/managers of their responsibility to move information "down hill". We are quite
often directed to provide info to deans with the expectation they will communicate the info to their staff.
This does not always happen and can cause a feeling of isolation and disconection
Transparency and honesty in the decision making process. Removal of those bottle necks in the
administration that operate with immunity of the consequences of their lack of actions, or ignoring the
participative process.
Use City Chronicle as the communication piece for the SCC community.
Nope
Streamline and make it a priority. Often, we are all too busy with the day-to-day of our jobs that things
like communication, vision, and broader initiatives get lost.
Have a random diverse group brought to the table during major decision making. Not just Chairs/same
people.
Not really.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT I AM MISSING SO HOW CAN I ANSWER THAT?
Make decisions transparent - too many still occur behind clised doors.
Using the phone or email.
28
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Administrative Structures and Processes
“Agree” was the most common response to most of the items in this area. However, “Neutral” was the most
common response to the prompt “Administrative processes at the broad level of the whole college work well.
Please indicate your agreement/disagreement with each of the following statements.
2014 Survey
I understand how decisions that affect my
work are made.
I understand the overall administrative
structure of the college.
Administrative processes in my division or
unit work well.
Administrative processes at the broad
level of the whole college work well.
College processes allow all constituent
groups to participate in decision-making.
Data (qualitative or quantitative) are used
in decision making at the college.
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
Strongly
Disagree
Don't
Know
Response
Count
24
79
47
48
22
4
224
44
104
36
30
10
0
224
24
70
59
38
29
4
224
8
59
80
38
24
14
223
15
62
62
41
33
12
225
27
72
63
14
10
38
224
skipped question
29
There is a wide range of the exact level of agreement about the degree to which administrative processes work
effectively. Ratings in some areas, for some groups, increased from 2011 to 2014 while others decreased. For
2014 the overall pattern in the percent of respondents who agreed or strongly with statements indicating
understanding of administrative structures and processes was Administrators > Faculty > Classified staff.
Administrative Processes: Percent of “strongly agree” or “agree” responses.
(Changes of 10 or more percentage points from 2011 to 2014 are noted by bold italics)
Faculty
Classified
staff
Administrator
I understand how college decisions that affect my work are made.
2011 Survey
2014 Survey.
38%
44%
56%
41%
90%
93%
72%
59%
90%
100%
61%
32%
80%
93%
I understand the overall administrative structure of the college.
2011 Survey
2014 Survey.
66%
67%
Administrative processes in my division or unit work well.
2011 Survey
2014 Survey.
54%
42%
Administrative processes at the broad level of the whole college work well.
2011 Survey
2014 Survey.
34%
28%
44%
24%
90%
80%
College processes allow all constituent groups to participate in decision-making.
2011 Survey
2014 Survey.
40%
31%
56%
28%
90%
93%
Data (qualitative or quantitative) are used in decision making at the college.
2011 Survey
2014 Survey.
43%
44%
49%
38%
80%
93%
29
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
If you would like to add any comments related to your answers to the question above, please do so here.
In many ways, decision making is fine at the division/departmental level (at least in my division), but there appears
to be a disconnect between the higher administration's decision making, specifically in regards to shared
governance, and the rest of the college.
The data gathering at the college is often selective which tends to bias the decisions that are made. My
observation is that this might be due to the personal agenda of the leadership in the PRIE division which
influences the types of data that is gathered, reported on, and made available to the college at large.
Data seem to be used as a weapon sometimes--when admin doesn't want to do something proposed by faculty or
staff, admin requires data that doesn't exist or is difficult to obtain, but when admin wants to do something, the
same data standard is not imposed.
It would be great if all groups had an equal say. Also its best to listen to the people in the trenches. They have
day to day as well as history to help with decisions
The only way I can relate to this is that the college decision making is a lot like politics. The people running often
make promises to make the voters happy, but then they do whatever they want, regardless of who is affected.
They do what's best for them, not the people they represent.
Constituent groups get to help formulate things and express opinions about things but decisions are often made
higher up.
How is it possible that administrators were able to overturn the decision of the SCC Curriculum Committee on
faculty-driven curricular matters?
Decision sometimes seem arbitrarily made by the administration without considering faculty input.
We could be better at using data to drive decision making.
The overall administrative structure of the school has never been discussed with classified staff
There are too many cooks in the kitchen. Or rather, there are a bunch of line cooks who are being told they're
executive chefs. The shared governance process is ineffective. I don't believe that input is often valued. When it is,
it takes years to get anything done, and the issue at hand goes through a ridiculous game of telephone. By the
time anything is implemented, it's gone through so many committees that the original intent is often lost. I think we
should empower people we trust to make decisions, and hold them accountable. This committee business is
terribly frustrating.
I understand the need for measurability - but have issues with the seemingly endless calls for data and SLOs and
PROLOs and GELOs. Some of us would like to spend more time teaching than writing reports. When will the
college have enough data? I go back and forth between wanting someone else to handle it for me and realizing
that the faculty needs to be involved in the process. It's the amount of time and mental energy that it requires that I
find exhausting. And it breeds bureaucracy.
none
suggestions made to management are ignored consistently
I have had a relatively good experience at SCC and have felt encouraged to participate in shared governance,
with the caveat and understanding that my work still always gets done. I definitely get the impression that the
efficiency by which I complete my job responsibilities cannot suffer if I am going to participate in shared
governance activities. Otherwise I would not be allowed. However, I know that many of my fellow classified
employees, especially in the financial aid department, are not supported or encouraged by their supervisor or
dean to participate in the senate and standing committees.Supervisors and managers often pay "lip service" about
classified employees serving on committees and the senate, but in reality, when they speak privately, one-on-one
with the individual employees in their departments, they are relaying the opposite impression. For example,
employees are told that if they can't get their work done then they have no business serving on a standing
committee, attending professional development activities, etc. But, the reality is that the work will always be there,
no matter what. So we have to work as a team to find ways to educate, uplift, rejuvenate, and positively encourage
our classified employees to grow personally and in their professional skills and capabilities and knowledge. We
must get creative, think outside the box, rather than just giving up and closing the door on the classified
employees' faces.
data is not always the whole story, sometimes decisions ignore the intangibles or data that would be difficult to
determine
30
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
We have many communication breakdowns in our division (some of which involve our administrative assistant). I
think part of the problem is that each constituency group defines "participatory decision-making" differently. I think
administrators seek faculty input, whereas faculty want to engage in collaborative decision-making. Getting input
involves a top-down decision-making process, whereas collaboration is a power-sharing, non-hierarchical
approach.
The effectiveness of the day-to-day and major administrative processes in our division is poor. The
communication between our division and the office of instruction breaks down routinely, especially in terms of
scheduling. Department chairs in our division are regularly cleaning up the errors of commission and omission
made at the division level and/or office of instruction.
About #1a above: I know how decisions are made, but I believe that they should be made by looking at different
measures than those currently used. About #1f: I feel that data is used to make decisions, but sometimes the data
is limited or faulty (e.g., the issue with online teaching surveys a couple of years ago).
More reminders from the division about due dates for FLEX forms, absence reports would help.
Some decisions are made without input of the people most involved.
these questions seem to forget that the college decision-making processes are very much affected by those made
at the District Office level and we don't learn much about those
Constituency groups may be invited to participate, but I don't know how much their participation is valued. Also,
because of all the work we do teaching, we don't have time to participate or to be prepared to participate, so our
opinions are not heard.
It feels as though the decisions made at the District level or above are made with not enough consideration of dayto-day realities of the classroom.
most processes are not the problem, it the degree of willingness to follow them. I understand our planning process
very well and the decision making process yet there are thing that happen that make no since and I have no idea
how or what input was used.
In some areas anecdotal evidence is used in decision making. We sometimes focus on one aspect of the data
without considering the whole picture.
Although I agree that data is used in decision making at the college, I find the insistence that we must have such
data in order to justify what we do an affront to the spirit and purpose of a liberal education. Education is valuable
in and of itself -- it need not result in transfer degrees. When we set the goal of education as the end point of a
degree, we lost the focus we should place on the experience itself. This is just flat out wrong to me.
The data that administration thinks is so important to the decision making process is helpful. However, it is a big
mistake to think that it is robust enough to be the definitive criteria for decision making. The most important
information needed for good decision making is a clear understanding of the professional views and judgements of
the people doing the work of teaching and supporting our students.
I've seen evidence in my department of conflicts between the administration above the dean and the dean and
faculty. The dean and faculty are always trying to find newer and better ways to collect data to support new
classes to replace old models or changes to existing classes, but the administration is focused on money. This
makes sense, because the community colleges have little money and have to be careful how they use it, but,
unfortunately, this means that the faculty, who understand the teaching they are doing and how to improve it, are
ignored, sometimes even when they have collected solid data. This isn't the fault of the administration, I think,
ultimately. Our state is terrible at giving money to education and that causes an untenable conflict between those
responsible for education directly and those responsible for balancing the budgets.
I don't have much to add except for that I feel that I have little to no input into some decisions that affect my job.
For the most part, my dean communicates effectively with my division and is clear in explaining reasons for
division-level decisions, but I admit that I often find myself wondering how certain decisions are made above the
level of Deans, particularly ones in which I am certain the faculty were not asked for input when the decisions
clearly affect us and our students.
The groups "participate" but the administration isn't listening.
College processes allow all constituent groups to participate in decision-making? Yes. Is the data gained in these
processes used in the final decisions? In my opinion, No.
Being new, not fully aware of the effectiveness of current processes.
31
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Data when done on a departmental level can often be skewed in favor of the department resulting in funding for
that department. It's important for research and data collection to come out of the PRIE office for the purpose of
equality and consistency. Furthermore, some departments and programs are much smaller than others which
does not allow time for staff and faculty to participate on committees or attend meetings where there is a better
opportunity for dialogue and input.
I have none.
I agree data is used. I do not agree that it is used as effectively as it could be or for the best educational outcome
for students; I sometimes have the impression the data reduces students to passing rates ("success") and $$$. I
do not agree that should be at the forefront of an educational institutions decisions
WE focus much more on quantitative data than qualitative and we need to correct that
I think this survey was not thought out because the questions are presumptive. You need more data or
information from focus groups of faculty adjunct and full time to brainstorm what is happening with the breakdown
of communication at this college and why so many people either have left or are leaving. One issue is the refusal
to recognize that the system we have now does not work and any and all ideas for fixing this system have been
rejected even before they are mentioned because of the campus climate. It is unfortunate but the truth.
I think so much of what we call communication is surveys and planning forms sent from the deans to the
departments to complete. It takes us time and energy and then we don't really know where they go. The Unit
plans were designed for long term planning. But now they seemed to be used in a negative way. If you need
something the response is "is it in your unit plan?' If it isn't you are told it is not possible. I don't think that is really
what the unit plan was supposed to do. It was supposed to help us plan. Not bring plans to a dead halt.
The SCC President has imposed multiple policies that discourage attendance at prof. dev. conferences so much
that people are missing good opportunities to improve their teaching. There are no good reasons for these
policies.
Data is not presented accurately.... Questions that are asked in meetings regarding data are never answered. Far
too many decisions are made due to a "gut feeling" as opposed to using data.
The use of data is not as effective as it could be, if for no other reason that we have never been trained to interpret
data properly. Most of the time we simply speculate when presented with data. I also feel that in some cases, we
don't want to face the reality of what the data suggests in terms of our effectiveness as an institution.
I understand how decisions affect my work but I am not sure that Admin does. While the college process may
state it "allows" all participation the reality is that the true process has no real support for Classified staff. No state
mandate to make it happen. Permission is at the whim of a supervisor.
we need industry to tell us where to put any growth money we get.
Administrative processes may be working better than I am aware of, since I am necessarily aware of stuff that isn't
working.
Important decisions are made at the top, and sometimes for political reasons that do not best serve faculty, staff,
or students.
What data is used is often irrelevant or meaningless due to incompatibility among samples and inappropriate
demographic chopping, completion rates being a recent example. Why not do true experiments such as
eliminating the bookstore and see how outcomes are affected (if at all).
College processes are not always followed.
How are administrative decisions made? Does input from faculty and staff make a difference? Can this be
documented? I would like to see one college web page devoted to admin transparency.
For question about Administrative processes in my unit working well: I think there is always room for
improvement, but with high workloads, it is difficult to get projects done in a timely manner. Some deadlines could
be considered softer so that the pressure to stay late and get things done isn't there.
There are some administrative processes, such as schedule development, that continue to use inefficient and
archaic procedures that lead to excessive amounts of time and frustration expended on inputting and reinputting
the same data into multiple platforms. This requires time and effort to check and double check the work at multiple
stages of the process.
The process unfortunately takes a lot of time and can therefore be detrimental to the issue.
32
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Chairs, or at least coordinators should be allowed to have open discussion meetings directly with admin. You
never really know how the dean presents division/dept concerns to admin, it doesn't feel like you're "allowed" to go
straight to admin with a concern, and it doesn't really feel like admin knows the day-to-day issues going on in
division or department meetings. Division meetings at convocation are a waste, just a welcome back, and not a
lot of explanation about what's been happening or is going to be happening. The running theme here is the
bottleneck the dean causes in the communication pathways.
Again, decision making is not just an opportunity to be heard and then have the administration make a final
decision that contradicts what most people asked for. While I realize that's how the college operates, don't waste
my time asking for input and then not really consider it in decision-making. Be creative— find solutions that
compromise needs and work for many.
Many administrative processes at the broad level of the whole college work decently (for a bureaucracy), but
frequently those related to Operations/Facilities are cumbersome, obtuse, and don't take place in a timely manner.
There are not enough classified staff participating. We need to ask why
Processes do ALLOW all constituents to participate, but that participation is encouraged more for some groups
than others (adjuncts and staff, for example, usually have to make extraordinary efforts to participate).
Although we are sometimes surveyed for our insights and stands on specific issues, the faculty doesn't actually
seem to have much clout in if or how new policies are adopted or enacted.
I am concerned how data is being interpreted. Sometimes it seems that we interpret it to meet our plan that we've
had prior/ just to reinforce what we already think should happen. Or data is used against faculty in terms of
success rates and fill of classes/students served rather than considering the unique aspects of a program that
might require a different approach.
Since I have no access to how data are collected or interpreted, I have to say that I don't know!
I understand how the processes are supposed to work, but I also see where they fail. The overall administrative
structure of the college is good although cumbersome. Administrative processes within a division or unit are only
as good as the dean or supervisor. The dean and supervisor should not rely on the constituency group to convey
information to their direct or indirect reports. If a person work in an area supervised by a manager or supervisor, it
is the supervisors responsibility to ensure that there is sufficient verbal and written communication regarding
decisions, information and potential changes under their authority. This is where feelings get hurt and grudges are
begun against managers/supervisors who seem to make arbitrary decisions. The employee should not be the last
one to know what is happening.
College constituencies do participate, but the feeling is that constituency recommendations are not heard. More
communication or acknowledgment of constituency recommendations, especially when disagreed with, needs to
occur. Data is used in decision making, but too often in a short sighted or narrow view which emphasizes the
quantitative over the qualitative.
It's not a matter of participation, it's the equality of how that participation is used to make decisions. It still feels like
a very caste system and faculty needs and desires are heard and acted on a much larger degree than classified.
Student interests are even less revered than staff.
The structure of the college is top down and not participative in deed at all. My division has an incompetent dean
who could not give you a straight answer if you asked him what time it was. Administrative process are designed
to spin with little or no action taken, or working on trivial issues that prevent innovation from occurring. A classic
bureaucracy. Surveys are a classic example of this. Data is manipulated to produce the desired outcomes and not
shared with constituent groups unless it offers the outcome desired.
Unit level decision making & processes tend to work well; at the division level things are usually fine although
issues around transparency sometimes occur. At the college level, there may be opportunities for input or
discussion, but the input from staff impacted by decisions is routinely ignored and lack of transparency in
decision-making has become a major problem.
MANY TIMES DECISIONS ARE MADE THAT ARE NOT LOGICAL OR USE COMMON SENSE, WHICH MAKES
ME WONDER WHAT WERE THEY THINKING.
I don't always believe that data driven decisions are the best decisions.
Data is given in abstract language and not easily u derstood.
No.
33
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Effectiveness of Constituency Groups and Committees
Effectiveness of Leadership Groups
It appears that college employees are not generally knowledgeable about the effectiveness of the constituency
leadership groups. “Don’t know” was the most common response to most of these items for faculty and classified
staff respondents. For respondents who did not mark “don’t know” the ratings of the effectiveness of the constituency
groups varied widely. Each employee group was knowledgeable about its own constituency leadership.
Administrators were most knowledgeable about the effectiveness of the constituency leadership groups. The pattern
was similar to that of the 2011 survey. Because of the large number of “Don’t Know” responses, an analysis
comparing the percentage responding with the highest ranking (Good) f between the two survey years was not
conducted.
Please rate the effectiveness of each of the following groups.
Good
Fair
Poor
97
57
35
35
55
43
49
45
10
10
26
11
28
57
40
60
22
9
2014 Survey
Academic Senate
Classified Senate
Senior Leadership Team
Associated Student
Government
Executive Council
Department Chairs Council
Don't
Know
Response
Count
59
221
220
220
219
110
110
128
129
94
skipped question
219
220
33
Please rate the effectiveness of each of the following groups.
2014 Survey
Academic Senate
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't Know
Classified Senate
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't Know
Senior Leadership Team
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't Know
Faculty
Classified
staff
Administrator
60
21
9
1
5
33
2
11
106
6
73
3
1
15
26
5
6
106
24
2
20
72
14
25
13
10
14
4
54
44
20
10
1
75
106
Associated Student Government
Good
16
Fair
19
42
Response
Count
1
3
15
194
193
7
7
72
1
0
15
9
15
5
5
193
34
Communication and Governance Survey
Poor
Don't Know
Fall 2014
5
2
65
46
105
72
11
17
12
8
12
4
66
47
106
Department Chairs Council
Good
33
Fair
31
Poor
5
Don't Know
37
106
71
Executive Council
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't Know
7
15
2
48
72
3
2
15
192
4
7
1
3
15
192
9
3
0
3
15
answered question
skipped question
193
194
29
Do you understand the role of each of these groups and how their work affects you? If you would like to
comment on the work of any of these groups, please do so.
Yes, I understand their roles.
I strongly feel that the President's office is currently a hindrance to the shared governance process. Leadership, from
what I can tell, currently considers shared governance as a nuisance to its seemingly top-down approach to decisionmaking.
The role and work of these groups is often obscure. I would appreciate more clarification on the roles and work of
each of these groups using a venue that is more easily obtainable.
yes
I don't know the role of the Senior Leadership Team; I only know it consists of the top campus administrators. Don't
know who makes up the Executive Council or what it's role is. Don't know the role of the Department Chairs Council
(share info with each other?).
groups work reasonable well within their constituency but collaboration across constituencies is not always collegial
and effective.
Yes I do!
I have no idea how these groups function.
Not really.
No. I do not know who participates in Executive Council, or senior leadership team.
Yes
Yes they are the constituency representatives of the institution.
No
No, I don't understand the role of each of theses groups and how their work affects me..
I have not learned what each group is responsible for on campus and how the groups actually play a role in making
decisions that affect the entire campus
Coordinators are completely ignored and have few paths to obtain information. I do understand the first two groupsthe remaining groups give out no information and are obscure in what they do and any outcomes of any discussions.
No, I don't, but would like o have a better understanding.
no
Define "effectiveness."
no
No
35
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
No, how would I?
I do see faculty chairs making decisions that affect classified workload and schedules. I know that is not suppose to
happen!
Not particularly (for the 'don't know)
Not really. It's hard to rate effectiveness of groups that I'm not familiar with, and that I don't really understand their
responsibilities.
I am not clear on the role of Executive Council and Department Chairs Council.
I do not know the difference between the Senior Leadership Team and the Executive Council
Yes
I do understand the roles of each group and how their work affects me. I understand the importance of classified work
as related to my classroom experience and their role in campus committees, but difficult to determine the
effectiveness of the classified senate directly.
I do understand the role of each of these groups. In the last few years, I've seen some really disrespectful
communication at the level of administration, and that doesn't facilitate a collaborative decision-making environment at
all. While we are all free to disagree, I think it's so important that we engage in respectful and meaningful
communication, and I've witnessed some blatant examples of disrespect on the part of some administrators in these
venues. We expect our students to respect one another while they wrestle with difficult topics in the classroom, and
we need to meet that same standard.
The Academic Senate spends an inordinate amount of time and energy rehashing ideas and complaints that have
been worked through in the past. A few very strong voices in the Academic Senate have much more influence on the
agenda and direction of this body than they should.
Not precisely
We don't get much information about Senior Leadership Council or Department Chairs Council
Not at all. I have been at SCC for seven years, and I have no idea how these groups' work affect me. I can imagine
gaining information through Flex activities, Convocation. Something needs to change to make faculty fully cognizant
of the ways in which these groups affect the work we do.
I understand fairly well. The information on what they do is readily available.
Yes.
Im not Involved In Exec council anymore and don't hear conversations, but I do know that decisions and input have
been given and a complete different thing happens.
I am learning how each of these groups affect my department/division. I am too new to fully grasp if they are effective.
Each group is relatively effective within its own area. However, each groups lack of understanding of the other groups
thinking and point of view greatly reduces their governing effectiveness. Lack of robust communication is a serious
shortcoming of the system of governance.
Yes. I do understand.
Yes.
I don't understand the interrelationships as well. I also think the effectiveness depends on the communications from
the representatives in these groups to the constituents.
I don't really understand the exact role of each of these groups, I'm sorry to say.
I don't know how exactly the Senior Leadership Team, Executive Council and Dept. Chair Council affects me directly.
Thank goodness we have a strong union. They help block/deflect a lot of the administrator BS.
Thank goodness that we have a strong Department Chairs Council. We have learned a lot about the crap a lot of
administrators/deans are doing.
No, I don't know what they do or how it affects me.
No I do not understand the role of SLT, Exec Council or Dept. Chairs Council.
No I am not familiar with who comprises the Senior Leadership Team, Executive Council and Department Chairs
Council.
At present constituency leadership is, I believe, especially strong and engaged.
Academic senate is often biased, closed minded, show favoritism.
Yes, but never hear about what the other groups are doing outside of academic senate.
no, I do not understand how what they do affects me
36
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
More information needs to be given to all stakeholders from the executive council and the department chairs council.
It is mostly hush hush and people can't buy into a system when they don't know what is going on.
I don't know what the Senior Leadership Team does or the Executive Council. Who are they and how are they
selected? What do they do? Who do they report to? Where are the minutes of the meetings?
no, I don't know the roles.
I'm new, so I don't have a complete grasp of the entire structure yet. There are so many different groups - perhaps the
sheer number of groups and wide range of stakeholders are part of any communication gap.
Yes, I understand the role of each group. Communication goes both up and down the ladder. I believe that the
Academic Senate does function well. The others need to be more transparent.
Not sure how effective any of these bodies can be when removed from regular positive interaction with students. The
further removed, the less effective.
Yes
Faculty have the power because they have laws in place allowing this.
The separate roles of the executive council and the senior leadership team are a bit unclear to me. The workings of
the Executive council seem mysterious, but the college is running well enough, so it must be fairly competent.
The work from these groups does not get down to the individual level. Shared governance means we are all part of
the decision, and we often are just informed about decisions that have already been made.
I don't know how the Senior Leadership Team or the Executive Council function.
Yes. The question is do groups such as Executive Council understand why they exist and what their true purpose is?
yes
I don't understand the work of SLT or Exec Council. Who are they, what is their agenda, and what decisions do they
make? To what extent do they consider input from the college?
No
Yes I understand the roles.
I don't know much about the senior leadership team, the executive council or the department chairs council. I never
hear the results of their meetings or anything else about them.
Yes I understand but I don't feel they communicate information to who they are representing well enough.
What is the executive council?
Mostly
Senior Leadership Team— please understand that the name alone is alienating and sounds very top down. Calling
yourself leaders does not make you leaders. It sounds like a desperate attempt to make yourself leaders by just
naming yourselves this way. STOP. It's awful.
If bluntness offends you, don't read this response. While I respect many individual faculty for their
knowledge/experience and dedication to students, my limited experience with Academic Senate is that of a group of
people who are complainers and full of their own opinions. While I know that SLT and Executive Council exist, I'm not
entirely clear what their purpose is (but I haven't put a lot of effort into trying to find out, either). Associated Student
Government seems to have some good years and some mediocre years, which makes sense given the transitory
nature of our students.
I understand the role of each. As I understand, the Executive Council has only one faculty representative.
Considering the size of this group, I wonder if enough information is getting through?
As a faculty member, the minutes from the Academic Senate are my only exposure to issue affecting our campus. The
minutes from that meeting are the ONLY thing that is brought to my attention.
This is actually the first time I have heard of the existence of a couple of these groups, so no, I do not understand the
role of these groups. I understand Academic Senate because I volunteered to serve a couple of years ago.
It is difficult to give these groups an overall rating. Often their hands are tied by external requirements.
I am no longer a Department Chair but Department Chairs Council while I was there seemed to have degraded to a
festival of complaining and was hard to sit through.
I understand them very well and must say that a lot of people are working very hard, but success is sluggish at best.
More importance should be placed on communication across constituencies. All of these groups, with the exception of
Executive Council, are limited in membership to just one constituency.
37
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
I think that the DCC offers hope although it is viewed by the administration as a hornets nest, to be appeased and
manipulated. Faculty senate is frustrated by structure and the fact that it has limited time to the point it can only deal
with mundane issues and not tackle the larger faculty concerns. It is dismissed by top administration when it begins to
challenge the status quo. The 50 minute format in the noon hour is a ridiculous lack of time to offer up any true
discussion and I opportune for faculty who are in the trenches and teaching students. It should be scheduled on
Fridays for a two hour block to behoove the opportunity for faculty to serve and spend adequate time to address
campus and faculty issues.
No
No.
I UNDERSTAND THEIR ROLE IN THEORY.
AND HOW IT AFFECTS ME IS I USUALLY WONDER WHAT WERE THEY THINKING.
Yes, I understand the role of each of the groups
yes
Yes I do.
Yes.
38
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Effectiveness of Standing Committees and the Campus Issues Process:
It appears that college employees are not generally knowledgeable about the effectiveness of the College
Standing Committees or the Campus Issues process; “I don’t know” was the most common response to most
of these items for faculty and classified staff respondents. In some cases, “I don’t know” was the response
of greater than 60% of the respondents in a given group. Of the employ groups, administrators were most
knowledgeable about the effectiveness of the constituency leadership groups. For respondents who did not
mark “don’t know” the ratings of the effectiveness of the constituency groups varied. Because of the large
number of “Don’t Know” responses, an analysis comparing the percentage responding with the highest ranking
(Good) f between the two survey years was not conducted.
Please rate the effectiveness of each of the following:
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't
know
Response
Count
91
45
49
55
34
39
41
48
38
34
61
40
42
64
9
9
11
8
9
1
10
5
5
12
19
10
23
70
215
215
216
215
216
217
216
216
216
215
217
215
216
2014 Survey
Budget Committee
Campus Development Committee
Campus Safety Committee
Curriculum Committee
Educational and Information Technology Committee
Learning Resources Committee
Matriculation and Student Success Committee
Planning, Research & Inst. Effectiveness Committee
Honors & Awards Committee
Staff Development Committee
Staff Equity & Diversity Committee
Student Equity Committee
Campus Issues Process
43
62
105
69
62
54
83
91
72
50
48
34
114
88
68
99
113
104
90
86
70
108
115
95
skipped question
36
Please rate the effectiveness of each of the following:
2014 Survey
Budget Committee
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't know
Campus Development Committee
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't know
Campus Safety Committee
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't know
Faculty
Classified staff
Administrator
46
21
9
5
14
28
1
28
103
34
69
18
19
7
12
13
2
59
42
103
69
31
28
4
16
15
5
40
34
1
0
0
15
Response
Count
187
8
6
0
1
15
187
6
6
0
3
39
Communication and Governance Survey
Curriculum Committee
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't know
Fall 2014
103
70
15
65
15
8
1
13
17
5
16
103
Educational and Information Technology Committee
Good
37
Fair
20
Poor
5
Don't know
41
103
Learning Resources Committee
Good
33
Fair
22
Poor
0
Don't know
49
104
Matriculation and Student Success Committee
Good
29
Fair
23
Poor
7
Don't know
45
104
Planning, Research & Inst. Effectiveness Committee
Good
45
Fair
17
Poor
4
Don't know
38
104
Honors & Awards Committee
Good
45
Fair
19
Poor
3
Don't know
37
104
Staff Development Committee
Good
42
Fair
27
Poor
8
Don't know
27
104
Staff Equity & Diversity Committee
Good
24
Fair
19
Poor
10
Don't know
51
104
Student Equity Committee
46
70
14
9
1
46
70
17
7
1
45
70
14
12
1
42
69
18
12
0
39
69
25
7
1
36
69
18
16
2
33
69
15
8
6
41
70
1
0
1
15
188
188
9
4
0
2
15
188
4
7
0
4
15
189
8
5
0
2
15
188
12
2
0
1
15
188
10
3
0
2
15
188
6
7
0
2
15
188
6
7
0
2
15
189
40
Communication and Governance Survey
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't know
Campus Issues Process
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't know
Fall 2014
23
19
8
12
10
2
54
44
104
68
13
30
12
11
16
7
49
35
104
69
8
7
0
0
15
187
5
9
0
1
15
answered question
skipped question
188
190
33
If you would like to comment on the work of any of these groups please do so here.
The ones that are marked as "poor" seem to be ineffective. The PRIE committee is dominated by the personal
agenda of the PRIE dean most of the time and somewhat paralyzed because of this issue. There does not
seem to be a lot of information available regarding the Staff Equity & Diversity and Student Equity committees.
Little interest in maintaining ethnic and gender balance across all categories of professional employment. In
counseling white males have been virtually excluded from being hired through the normal hiring process for
over 40 years.
How can the administration override the Curriculum Committee?
As an adjunct faculty member, I do not receive reports about what in the of these committees are currently
working on.
Some committees need to meet more than 50 minutes per month
I don't really understand what the committees roles are in disseminating information.
Budget is another area where there's a process in place, but there are higher level decisions being made that
undermine the work of that committee. Who is deciding when an MOE will be allowed and when it won't. It will
be interesting to see what happens with it now that Martenelli is gone. The Unit Planning process is much
improved although it's not doing a good job with staffing requests. It's hard to rank staffing with anything else
because then the prioritization process doesn't work. Maybe budget requests for the 2 should be separated?
none
I don't feel comfortable rating the effectiveness of committees I know very little about. I think that for the most
part, these committees are doing fine work, but that is just an assumption.
Most of us never hear about the work that standing committees are doing unless we are a member of that
committee. I think we need a better process for communicating the work that these committees do. I also think
that some committees need to be given more decision-making power. The Campus Development Committee,
for example, has a history of rubber-stamping decisions that have already been made by administration, and
this is not truly in the spirit of participatory decision-making. I do think that the Budget Committee and the
Curriculum Committee function very well.
Difficult to gauge. Although I am sure I see the results of these committees, it is usually not attributed to them
so I am unclear on how effective they are. Also, in not being a part of the meetings of these committees, I have
little knowledge of what they fail to address. The Academic Senate does do a good job making their minutes
available.
The budget committee and the curriculum committee are very effective because of the quality of the dialogue
they have with faculty. The others are ineffective, because of the poor dialogue they have with faculty.
41
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
I've been hearing from the Student Equity Committee lately. They seem to be doing good research and I hope
that they are able to come up with some solid solutions to the disparity they see. I have some ideas of my own
on how to help the African American community, who are struggling disproportionately, but my ideas aren't
based on research, and I could be wrong. I have also heard some of the recent changes from the Matriculation
and Student Success Committee. Making each student get an education plan will, I hope, help students to
navigate the bureaucratic element of college.
I don't have interaction with, receive email from or hear anything about many of these committees.
Once again there is the issue of time available for active participation. People who have the time to actively
participate on various committees are usually those whose voice is included in decision making whether it be
reflected in funding, Program Plans, processes or procedures. There is also a perspective on campus of "the
squeaky wheel". Most of us don't want to be the squeaky wheel (boisterous, grouchy, giggly, flirtatious, etc.) to
manipulate administrators. We just want our voices to be respectfully heard and our contributions to be valued
and truly considered.
Some members of Curriculum Committee need to restrain themselves. They waste other people's time talking
about meaningless details. Serving on that committee is tough enough.
The number of honors and awards given is way too small. More people should be recognized more often.
The committees that use data to make decision operate very well... the ones who do not, operate poorly.
We need a permanent Mentor Program. Classified Senate should be in charge of the Classified New Hires
Orientation.
Over the past few years, the budget committee has been effective in helping to bring the budget and planning
processes more out in the open. We know more about the budget processes largely due to their work.
Campus issues results need to be listed fully in minutes and shared with the entire campus.
Budget committee needs to work with the FULL BUDGET, not just earmarks. SDC seems to be looking for a
reason to exist.
Each of these areas make every effort to include all members of the college community. The fact that it is so
difficult to get people to serve on these committees may be the basis for the incorrect perception that
communication does not exist at the college level. My experience has shown that a number of the same
people serve on various committees due to the lack of others willing to serve. To add to this it seems that
people become interested in a specific committee only when the topic being discussed/evaluated affects them.
Communication in Budget Committee is sometimes dominated by people who don't seem to have paid
attention to the work or needs of other divisions than their own. Campus Development Committee would
benefit from a more can-do approach to issues.
Giving feedback or putting through a campus issues form is a risky thing. It is difficult to give feed back
anonymously directly to areas that need improvement. Especially when there is fear of upsetting people and
then getting passive-aggressive retaliation as a result.
campus issues get bogged down at the execetive level
Regarding the campus issues process: It seems to take a long time between the initiation of an "issue" and its
eventual resolution. However, I must commend the college on finally putting in place a rational answer to the
problem of smoking on campus.
I gave the Budget Committee a 'poor' rating because I'm concerned that they aren't not involved in campuswide and long term recommendations - only with one time only allocations. The faculty really need to have
significant input on long-term campus projects.
I'm sure each of these committee is providing an excellent service to the campus. I don't know, however, the
issues that a majority of these committees are exploring on campus. I have to proactively seek out the content
through personal meetings or though the minutes.
The effectiveness is uneven, but the framework is there and functioning. What I have seen is that these
committees rise to any need that occurs, and when there isn't a need they can vegetate effectively as well.
In my opinion, these groups (which include classified, management and faculty) generally perform better than
constituency based groups.
42
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Each of these committees that I have checked poor on is ham strung in their ability to tackle the meaningful
issues of their respective charges. Curriculum is a paperwork and minute nightmare. IT is decades behind.
Staff development is a battle ground controlled by the administration, staff equity and diversity and student
equity continues to challenge the status quo with little change and the campus issues forum is seen as a last
ditch effort to attempt to address crisis issues that have been continually swept under the rug.
I UNDERSTAND WHAT EACH GROUP IS SUPPOSED TO DO. WHETHER THEY ACTUALLY
ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING, I HAVE NO IDEA.
My impression it that committee effectiveness varies greatly. Some committees are completed dominated by a
manager who has oversight for an area & become simply a rubber stamp.
No.
Budget Committee process is unclear and inconsistent.
43
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Overall Comments
Please add any comments that you would like to include.
We need to rethink our approach to meeting the needs of our least-well-prepared students. Recent SCC research
documents a clear and ongoing need for more sections of pre-college skill-building classes to meet the needs of
our students. We need to think outside the box and develop ways to address this concern. To accept the status
quo ignores the scope and critical importance of this problem. After our own research has so clearly documented
this need, to continue business as usual only adds insult to injury.
Communicating effectively is the toughest challenge we face. I believe the demands on time impact effective
communication and I don't see a solution for that part of the problem. However, if we can be more deliberate in
how and when we communicate certain information we might make small improvements in our efforts.
I hope in the future their will be more meetings with faculty, President, Deans amongst Classified Staff
My second year here I was on a committee and was never able to go because my Dean would give me the release
time to do so. Since then I haven't really cared to try anymore to serve on a committee. Not interested in the
battle with the time needed to serve.
I have a very low level of complete understanding of how all the different committees and groups integrate to
become a whole voice capable of making decisions that affect the entire campus. I have to go online and locate
special group or committee sites to get just a basic understanding. If I don't motivate myself to research
information I'm clueless and just because I attempt to research doesn't mean I completely understand the purpose
or process of each group or committee on campus.
none
Management is only interested in these issues when Accreditation rolls around; then, business as usual.
We really need a regular, monthly email about what is going on on campus.
Department moves, Overall staffing changes, Paperwork changes, Process changes.
It would be ideal if the people affected by changes would be asked about how the process is going as well. I see
administrators and department chairs making decisions on stuff they truly know little about. We rely on personal
characteristics of individual people to rely communication and input and this is not a dependable way to do that.
VP should be talking to employees directly in Food service department for the department needs and how thinks
are really run and improvements needed. VP are not getting
full story on how cafes are run in the district.
I believe that we at SCC have the capacity to improve our college decision making process and communication
processes. Greater transparency about processes, new initiatives, etc., and inclusion of feedback from all
constituency groups will allow for a greater degree of trust among all of the constituency groups. We are all
stakeholders in the overall health of our organization so we should all have a voice, including students, classifieds,
faculty, and managers.
It would be helpful if the President communicated to the college regularly about the state of the institution and the
progress (or lack of) that we are making on major initiatives. It is disheartening to know that 95% of the time an
email is received from the President's office, it is about someone who has passed away. This is important
information, but it is almost the only time we receive emails from the President's office. We receive more emails
on matters critical to the college from the Chancellor's office.
More face to face communication
The president, vice presidents, and deans should visit faculty in their offices and during department meetings to
find out how we are doing.
All campus employees should be encouraged and given time to get to know one another. I feel I know very few
people outside of my division and the campus committees I've served on. The campus police, especially, should
make it a point to know every employee.
Poor decision making is almost always due to poor communication and inadequate dialogue, for whatever reason.
Our lack of adequate communication is partly a to lack of commitment to shared governance, partly due to
inherent flaws in the formal structure of our governance system, and partly due to lack of the extraordinary
leadership needed to overcome those flaws.
44
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
I feel our input is valued more by some and less by others. Some administrators and supervisors are resistant to
letting people be involved and make it very hard and a lot of times college wide decision making is just a lip service
term. Looks good on paper but I have more questions as the years go on about what's really going on. there's a
real sense of distrust that permeates throughout the district and on our Campus
You might, from one of my responses, know who I am; I'd appreciate it if you didn't share my responses by using
my name. Thanks!
Please see my earlier comments.
I do believe in our college and in our people; I see the good in many of the things that we do. I believe that if we
return to the values of a liberal education, we will see a significant improvement in disposition and in morale. I also
believe that whatever we may be doing poorly right now can change with the right attention and effort paid to it.
SCC used to be a much better place to work, and I LOVED working here. Now, many times I dread even coming to
work and I detest interaction with my dean and the administrators. Their condescending attitudes, poor decisions
and rudeness to faculty are very disturbing and make for an extremely unpleasant work environment. With the
current environment, I would strongly discourage anyone from working here. The previous administration cared
much more and attempted to have a collegiate environment. Now it's a whole lot like high school.
Perhaps in the orientation, provide more information on the various committees, structure, etc.
What is the point? No matter what I suggest nothing is ever done and my job is left in jeopardy if I mention
anything. So how can I contribute to making the climate better when I don't have any job security?
Work to overcome structural and social barriers to getting to know students and learn about their experiences at all
levels of the college -- faculty, staff, management. Students (the real ones, not the "the students" in the abstract)
are "the same page" we can all be on and once we're on the same page, we can work through communication
issues. Recognize the relationship between information and power.
Large organizations communicate and decide on many issues. Individuals within large organizations should take
responsibility for obtaining the information they need or want. Too many complaints about "poor communication"
from individuals who don't properly seek information.
While I believe that over all we do a fair job of communicating and engaging in efforts to have a broad decision
making process we are failing to convince many in the college community that we do so. We also need to better
provide for an effective flow of information in a way that will not overwhelm us. And in a some cases our decision
making process needs to be a bit more open and transparent.
Moral sucks. Admin's applying for new jobs - everyone knows. Constant change of leadership. New Admins who
do not support Shared Governance. Why did we have to take out the word "shared" ? - was the equal power
intimidating to others? Why do faculty act so superior to classified - many of us have Masters Degrees equal to
them so they are not educationally (or humanly) superior. Why do DO Admins get bonuses while we never get a
raise? How much more room do I have to tell you what I think?
I see almost no genuine communication(involving listening and trying to understand as well as talking) between
administrators and faculty or administrators and staff here. I don't feel that high-level administrators really hear and
take into account what faculty or staff have to say. I don't see shared governance here.
Too many decisions are made by administration at DO or campus level and we are just informed.
Monthly update from exec council and SLT via website
Can we, in an improving budget climate, hope to see more support from college leadership for college needs that
help students succeed, such as faculty and staff hires in impacted areas? I have felt increasingly that faculty/staff
and admin aren't on the same team. I hope that management will be able to listen more supportively to input from
the trenches.
I really do feel that the college does a great job communicating to its members. The ability to get information
online as well as the ability to access info via the admin/dean/chair exists. There is so much information available
to anyone who wants to take the time to ask or research. The real question is do people really take the time to find
out or do they just like to complain because no one spoon feeds them the info. "You can lead the horse to water
but you cannot make them drink."
45
Communication and Governance Survey
Fall 2014
Having a way to anonymously submit general feedback for improving institutional processes would be a great way
to get more participation. Surveys can be to specific. A format that could be effective would be to create an online
form that has general questions related to the type of feedback someone is submitting so that it can be kept for
data purposes and then comments box for the more specific information related to the concern. And a box asking
for specific solutions to the problem to keep it interactive and positive.
Time must be made to allow participation. That means at ALL levels, practiced. Not just at the top. Off campus
area planning would be fabulous.
I know that the excuses of "too busy" and "not enough IT resources" are often put forward as reasons why certain
processes (like schedule development) are allowed to continue along in their present cumbersome way. However,
I think we need to "take the time to save the time"...step back and make the effort to streamline these procedures.
It will definitely improve morale in our division at least!
I love SCC with all my heart and want only success for us all. I just wish there was a way for admin to be more
accessible, and to hear the voices from the trenches. Thank you.
The decision making model at this institution is complex. Unfortunately, it many aspects it seems to be antiquated
in that it is based on an old industrial, top-down, assembly line chain of command. Perhaps some of it is
unavoidable since we are operating at the pleasure of the Legislature, the federal government and accreditation
boards. Nonetheless, faculty are not having a say in many issues that directly affect our lives and ability to teach.
For example, many of us feel required by our dedication and conscientiousness to spend a lot of time answering
student queries via email. But we have been unable to get compensated for these many hours per week that have
been added to our work week or to have our office hours reduced accordingly. Many of us maintain, based on
good experimental data, that we should have our students write copiously. But this writing takes a lot of time to
read and constructively comment on. We are still being asked to take more students into our classes than that
kind of writing and evaluation will allow for. Our workloads have grown tremendously and have become more and
more regimented, but there is very little concern by the administration regarding this burgeoning of work to be
done. We now have to have our book orders in before we have any time to evaluate or reevaluate the selections.
We need to turn in some extra project nearly every month: Requests for new hires, curriculum changes and
reviews, unit plans, SLO reports, substitute lists, etc. We don't have time to prepare for class, read academic
material that would enrich and update our coursework, orarrange for speakers or any other special activies. In
addition, we are required to work on committees, asked to be sponsors of student groups, encouraged to
participate in or stage special student events, etc. etc, and do Flex activities.
From the bottom, this is very disconcerting. Some of this must be brought up in contract discussions. But it would
be very helpful if faculty were give the opportunity to meet, discuss and propose. There is no time (by design?) to
do this.
While data can give you insight, there is no substitute for people talking with people, for administrators witnessing
what faculty experience, and vice-versa. As long as there is a barrier between administrators and faculty when it
comes to decision-making, bad choices will continue, and morale will be low.
Effective communication must carry through to the Dean and Dept. level; otherwise the efforts are largely muted.
I think that the vice presidents and the president should show more support and respect towards their deans!!!!
I think my colleagues feel hopeless and stymied by the administrative processes, I think the administration is for
the most part unwilling to work cooperatively to build an effective decision making process to further the quality of
education and I think the staff is over worked and under appreciated for their efforts. This sets up a negative
climate where people continue to retreat in to smaller and smaller worlds of communication and influence. It feels
like any attempt to move the institution forward is met with overwhelming resistance and gradually sucks the life
out of people who are innovative and would like to promote positive growth and change.
COLLEGE DECISION MAKING: I WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN END TO THE PRACTICE OF FEEDING PEOPLE
EVERY TIME THEY ATTEND A MEETING. THE COLLEGE SPENDS THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS EVERY
YEAR FEEDING STAFF AND FACULTY FOR NO APPARENT REASON. IF YOU CANNOT GET PEOPLE TO
ATTEND A MEETING UNLESS YOU PROVIDE FOOD, THEN SOMETHING IS VERY WRONG. IT SEEMS
THAT ALL OF THAT MONEY SHOULD BE SPENT ON OUR STUDENTS AND NOT FOR FEEDING PEOPLE
WHO MAKE A VERY DECENT WAGE.
You might want to remind people that, if they complain about lack of communication, yet fail to get involved, a
portion of the onus is on them.
46