Action Item: March 17, 2009
TO:
ACADEMIC SENATE
FROM:
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
PREPARED BY:
SUBJECT:
RECORDING SECRETARY
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Recommendation Number 1:
It is recommended that the minutes from the following meeting of the Santa Monica College
Academic Senate be approved as distributed:
Minutes of the 3 March 2009 Academic Senate Meeting
Present: Eve Adler, Brenda Antrim, Jan Austin, Dianne Berman, Teri Bernstein, Mary
Bober, Suzanne Borghei, Greg Brookins, Fran Chandler, Mary Colavito, Guido Davis
Del Piccolo, Judith Douglas, Georgia Farber, Tina Feiger, Gilda Feldman, Kathy Flynn,
Ken Geddes, Candyce Goodfellow, Terry Green, Craig Hammond, Nancy Hanson, John
Hoover, John Henderson, Janie Jones, Amber Katherine, Lesley Kawaguchi, John
Kennedy, Lucy Kluckhohn Jones, Deborah Kraut, Helen LeDonne, Laura Manson,
Natalina Monteiro, Pete Morris, Peter Morse, Andrew Nestler, Melody Nightingale,
Makoto Nishikawa, Eric Oifer, Jim Pacchioli, Pauli Peter, Toni Randall, Vicki Rothman,
Michelle Scholefield, Christine Schultz, Jacqueline Scott, Eleanor Singleton, Jim Smith,
Marci Spiegler, Howard Stahl, Susan Sterr, James Stramel, Gary Strathearn, Michael
Strathearn, Esau Tovar, Marc Trujillo, David Zehr
Excused: Simon Balm, Richard Goldenson, Janet Harclerode, Lantz Simpson, Kathy
Sucher, Richard Tahvildaran-Jesswein, Sal Veas
Absent: Ken Buckner, Rebecca Curtis, Bill Lancaster, Walter Meyer, Robert Ware, Ted
Wilkinson
Guests: Trustee David Finkel, Roxanne Masserat, Vicky Jiang, Gordon Dossett
I. Call to Order – President-Elect Eric Oifer called the meeting to order at 11:19 a.m.
II. Public Comments – ICC Chair Roxanne Masserat, and Vice-Chair Vicky Jiang spoke –
ICC Chair also chairs the Assoc Students Elections Cmmt. They seek maximum student
participation. They ask faculty to help them get the vote out. Students vote through their
student self-service system. Candidates’ platforms will be posted on the Assoc Students
website.
III. Action Items
A. Approval of the Minutes for December 9, 2008. Unanimously approved.
B. 2nd Read AR5113 Program Discontinuance Process – Mary Colavito,
Curriculum Committee Chair – Eric prefaced this by indicating that there hasn’t
been discussion of discontinuing any programs right now. Colavito reviewed the
doc with us.
Vote to approve: 55 in favor; one abstention
AR 5113 Program Discontinuance Process
1.
Approved by Curriculum Committee on 12/3/08
Identification
The appropriate senior administrator will identify a program to be considered for
discontinuance and specify the criteria used to make the identification. based upon criteria
appropriate for that program. With instructional programs, the Academic Senate and the Faculty
Association will be consulted. Criteria might include, but would not be limited to, issues
concerning enrollment, demand for a service, budget, facilities, staffing, and match with the
college’s mission or current goals and objectives. A summary of previous efforts to address the
issues relative to the criteria will be projects of the program will be included in the identification.
recommendation. which, in the case of instructional programs, will be given to the Academic
Senate and Faculty Association.
2.
Recommendation
A. For Instructional, Student Support, and Instructional Support Programs
1. Consultation
A. With instructional, student support, and instructional support programs, the
Academic Senate and the Faculty Association will be consulted.
B. The Academic Senate will employ appropriate committees to consider the
identified program and make a recommendation. This process will include
members of the designated program. It may also involve seeking input from
community groups.
2. Evaluation Criteria
The Administration and Academic Senate will attempt to reach mutual agreement on
specific criteria to be used to evaluate the program. If agreement is not reached, the
senior administrator will provide the Academic Senate with the criteria that the
Administration will use.
3. Recommendation
A. Addressing the specified evaluation criteria, the Academic Senate will prepare
a recommendation regarding the identified program.
B. The senior administrator will receive and consider the recommendations of the
Academic Senate, Faculty Association and other interested groups.
B. For other College programs
The appropriate senior administrator will consult relevant constituencies and receive
recommendations regarding the identified program.
3.
4.
Notification
A.
The senior administrator will notify the program leader(s) of the recommendation for
discontinuance, explain the criteria upon which the recommendation is based, and
inform the program leader(s) of the opportunity to appeal.
B.
The senior administrator Vice President will notify the members of the District
Planning and Advisory Council of the recommendation and, in collaboration with the
program leader(s), establish a timeline for consideration of the recommendation by the
District Planning and Advisory Council.
C.
The appropriate senior administrator will present the criteria upon which the
recommendation is based to the District Planning and Advisory Council for
discussion.
Appeal
A. Program representatives, including faculty and staff directly affected, will be
given the opportunity to appeal the recommendation and provide information
supporting the appeal to the District Planning and Advisory Council. The
constituent representatives on the District Planning and Advisory Council
Collegewide Coordinating Council will be able to provide assistance on how to
present the appeal if this is requested by the program. For instructional, student
support and instructional support programs, the Academic Senate may provide
support for the appeal.
B. Based upon the criteria supporting the recommendation and the information
presented in the appeal, the District Planning and Advisory Council will come
to a decision to support or not support the recommendation.
C. If the District Planning and Advisory Council decides not to support the
recommendation, it will provide the administration and the program
leadership with a plan direction as to how the issues surrounding the
recommendation for discontinuance can be resolved.
D. If the District Planning and Advisory Council decides to support the
recommendation, the recommendation will be submitted to the
Superintendent/President.
Reviewed and/or Updated 12/3/08
C. Recommendation to Change the Name of the Academic Senate Joint
Standing Committee: Vocational Education to Career Technical Education –
Eve Adler, Chair Vocational Education – Adler explained the reasoning behind the
change is to keep abreast of current statewide trends and the new name reflects more
accurately our programs. ERC was also consulted and this was deemed not a
significant change.
Vote to accept the name change: 56 in favor
D. 1st Read AR 4113 High School Concurrent Enrollment – Esau Tovar, Student
Affairs Chair – Tovar reviewed the current policy and the proposed change.
Vote to accept the 1st Read: 56 in favor
ARTICLE 4100
AR 4113
ADMISSION AND REGISTRATION
High School Concurrent Enrollment
High School Concurrent Enrollment permits high school students the opportunity to enroll
in courses at Santa Monica College or at the high school site for educational enrichment.
The purpose of the program is to provide “advanced scholastic” and “educational
enrichment opportunities for a limited number of eligible pupils” as defined by Education
Code, Section 48800 and 76002.
Enrollment fees will be waived for high school students participating in High School
Concurrent Enrollment. All other fees, including non-resident tuition apply.
Students are limited to six units, or two classes, per semester. Students will not be allowed
to take courses in subject areas that the student previously received a grade below a C,
whether taken at the college or high school level.
Students wishing to enroll in more than six units or two courses during the same semester
may submit a Petition for Special Consideration to the Associate Dean of Enrollment
Services. Petitions will be considered only for concurrent enrollment students who have
previously completed a minimum of: 1) one semester or session of academically-oriented
courses at Santa Monica College; and 2) have obtained a minimum GPA of 3.0 in the
previous coursework. Petitions will be considered on a case-by-case basis and may be denied
if in the judgment of the Associate Dean, there are circumstances warranting denial.
Definition: For the purpose of this administrative regulation, High School Concurrent
Enrollment students also include students participating in the Santa Monica College Dual
Enrollment Program and take SMC courses at their high school.
Requirements for High School Concurrent Enrollment
Admission of high school students is permitted for educational enrichment opportunities
under certain conditions.
1. The student must have completed the 8th grade or equivalent.
2. High School Concurrent Enrollment students will not be allowed to enroll in any
physical education courses.
3. At the time that an application is submitted, the student must adhere to the following
guidelines:
a. Submit a Santa Monica College High School Concurrent Enrollment
Approval form which includes:
i. Signature of high school principal or designee with his/her title and
high school counselor/coordinator, which states specific course(s)
for which the student has been approved to take during that semester
or term. Students will be limited to taking only those courses.
ii. Signature of parent or legal guardian.
b. The approval form with all appropriate signatures, as well as a copy of the
student’s high school transcript, will be required prior to the student’s
enrollment in each term.
4. High School Concurrent Enrollment students are required to complete the
mathematics and English assessments prior to their initial enrollment. To qualify to
participate in the program, students must place into level B English, or higher,
except in the following cases:
a. High School Concurrent Enrollment Students may be waived from the
mandatory English assessment and mathematics assessment requirements in
cases where they are enrolled only in activity courses, performance courses,
or other courses that do not have English or math skills prerequisites or
advisories upon the recommendation of the appropriate academic
department(s).
b. High School Concurrent Enrollment students may be waived from the
mandatory assessment requirement for cases when they attempt to enroll in
excess of the cumulative six unit limitation outlined in AR4111.4, provided
they enroll only in courses described in section 4a above.
5. Credit awarded for courses taken at Santa Monica College may be used to satisfy
high school subject or credit requirements, as defined by the student’s high school.
6. Students wishing to forfeit the college credit must file the College Credit Forfeiture
Request form within the first two weeks of the term. This decision is not reversible.
7. High School Concurrent Enrollment students may participate in extra-curricular
activities only at the high school level.
Reference:
Education Code Sections 48800 and 76001
Discussion: Q about “more than six units or two courses” Clarification that students
could take two 5-unit classes as well. Q about whether students would have a “3.0 GPA
in previous coursework at the high school.” Response that this will be added. Grammar
changes suggested and noted by Tovar. Clarification that incoming students need
approval by their high school principal or designee. Q about 4B and whether we make
that exception for our own students. Q about definition of “concurrent enrollment.”
Does that include homeschooled students and summer session students? Tovar responds
that they are considered “concurrent enrollment” and that we have ways of assessing
those students.
IV.
Information Items
A. President's Report – Eric Oifer
1. Faculty Leader Announcements: Basic Skills, Interdisciplinary Studies,
and Global Citizenship (PDF) and Agreement on Conventions Pertaining to
the Selection of Faculty Leaders – Eric reviewed the history leading up to the
current doc and its specifications.
Discussion:
Q about who composed these. Response that they were result of leaders’
meetings. Q about what the model of shared governance is because it came
about fairly quickly and w/o being sent past the Chairs Cmmt or Basic Skills
Cmmt. Basic Skills was seen as outside shared governance. These are similar
to the Scholars Program, Women’s Studies Program, etc. in how they came
about. Indication that there are a number of grammar errors in the doc. Q
about how various constituencies will “work together.” Eric indicates that
the position is still to be crafted. Comment that Global Citizenship really is
not outside the purview of the Acad Senate. Presumably someone who sits
on the Basic Skills Cmmt would fill the faculty leader role. Comment that
the direct tie is with the Senate Pres, not the Acad Senate. Eric explains that
it is a hybrid and liaison position. Q about whether the faculty should have a
voice in determining what sort of voice it should have? Eric responds that
these are objectives and goals that were approved by the Senate. Suggestion
that the Chairs Cmmt is the tie to the Academic Senate, which was not
consulted about this. The disciplines should be involved. IDS was a model
in that it was brought forward several times for discussion by Chairs.
Concern that it was implied that there was a need to write this doc up as if
there were a vacuum to fill, which is not the case. Q about whether the BSI
Task Force was consulted. The response is that it was not, but that this is
also not a basic skills plan. Q if the position will be established by the AS
Pres in consultation with the Acad V-P but w/o involvement by the Senate
itself. Noted that in the past there have been no interviews for these
positions. Q about how this resembles shared governance. Suggested that if
we had not proposed this plan, the position would have been filled solely at
discretion of Acad Affairs V-P. Remark that we are all interested in
increasing empowerment of the AS, not just the AS Pres. It’s essential that
the AS Pres consult with the AS. Reminder that the Women’s College was
disbanded even in the AS President’s presence and that this previous way of
doing things has not been working.
2. Report on Full-Time Faculty Hiring Presentation before the Board of
Trustees (February 28, 2009) – Eric states that SMC is at the worst % (46%
FT fac) it’s been in a long time (bottom 10% of the state). The plan agreed
to is 67% for the next 5-7 years, with the long-term goal being 75%. Agreed
that separations will be replaced and when they count for the next year. The
FTES for this year (335) would be used as the base from which we should
grow. Richard, Eric, Bernstein, Harclerode, Stahl, M. Strathearn, Schultz,
Kawaguchi participated in the presentation.
Discussion:
Q about update on FT hires for this coming year. Response is that there has
been no new information. Q whether the entire BOT was present. Aminoff
was absent. The next step is to discuss benchmarks (how we know we’re
making progress). Q if the BOT expressed any commitment to this. It will
be acknowledged by putting it on their agenda. Getting new FT fac will be
more difficult than getting replacements. CBO Hawk is onboard with
replacements. Q about what we’re waiting for in terms of replacements for
this year. Clarification that replacements will not occur in the same dept.
B. Accreditation Steering Committee Update – cmmt meets once or twice a
month and has been bringing together the information being gathered by the various
sub-cmmts. Goal is to have a first draft available in April. Any and all are
encouraged to get involved.
C. Institutional Flex Day – Judith Douglas, Chair PDC – morning of March 19th
flexday will be devoted to accreditation – the PDC website has the schedule for the
day. It will be on the main campus beginning with breakfast at the Pavilion. 10-11:45
reserved for departmental breakout sessions.
D. Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILO) – Suzanne Borghei and Nancy
Hanson – part of flexday will be devoted to developing ILO #1. Departments are at
different stages in their development. They may wish to look at the results of their
assessments and think about needed changes. Sheldon (campus researcher) will be
training depts. in coming up with assessment plans.
V.
Old Business Discussion
VI.
New Business Discussion
A. Global Citizenship -- Gordon Dossett, Chair Global Council – Dossett handed
out flyers about food for thought activities. Reviewed results of meetings between
Dossett, Richard, and Eric in thinking how the Council should operate in the future.
Dossett indicated that he argued against it becoming a Senate cmmt because there
are so many issues that do not concern the AS. It was decided not to change its
current form. Dossett will publicize what they are doing. The Task Force (80
members) changed into a workgroup now called the Global Council (25 members).
Meetings are open. Contract faculty should have received announcement about
Salzburg conference. www.smcglobal.org has the application process laid out. The
Pacifica Institute is a nonprofit interested in promoting exchange with Turkey. They
have offered the college six positions to go on a study tour. See Dossett for details.
The Global Connections Series will present a talk this week. Global Council had a
retreat recently (Dr. Tsang was present) about what more we could be doing with
global citizenship. It was suggested that there be a campus-wide theme that every
discipline works with in their classes. The first theme is “water.”
VII. Announcements – Tina Feiger announced Iranian Heritage Project a week from this
Thursday. 3:30-5:30 next to Arts Complex, RSVP by Friday. She left handouts. Douglas
reminds us that there is still funding for conferences from PDC. There is a $500 cap.
VIII. Adjournment – (M/S Stahl/Zehr) Meeting adjourned at 12:35 p.m. in memory of Sal
Veas’ father, Salvatore Veas.