Academic Senate Meeting Minutes

Thursday, October 11, 2007
12:45 -2:00 pm
Student Service Building,
Conference Rooms A & B

Senators Present: Carol Adair, Yolanda Bellisimo, Michael Dougan, Ron Gaiz, Erika Harkins, Patrick Kelly, Arthur Lutz, Sara McKinnon, Joe Mueller, Meg Pasquel, Radica Portello, Ingrid Schreck, Blaze Woodlief, Derek Wilson

Senators Absent: Robert Kennedy

Guests: Hoa-Long Tam, B. Blackman, B. Balestrere

Approval of Agenda & Minutes

Motion made to approve the agenda

Motion made to approve the minutes

Officers’ Reports

The President’s Report:

Š          A written report was submitted.

The Vice-President reported the following:

Š          Met with Gold Book team working to revise board policy to discuss grading policy and legal background from Title V

Š          Instructional Equipment committee met and discussed a computer policy

Š          Concerns were raised that IT policy differs from Tech Committee recommendation policy

Š          Rollover plan is stuck in IPC because they are discussing policy and procedure

Š          AS president will follow up on roll-over plan and on feedback loop to governance committee recommendations; this will be a future agenda item.

The treasurer reported the following:

Š          A report will be submitted to the secretary

Standing Reports

Curriculum Committee

Community Education

Š          Com Ed is starting new quarter on the 22nd of this month

Š          Com Ed Would like to work on partnership with credit classes and function as a feeder to credit classes; these classes should be used as a stepping stone to increase credit enrollment

Š          Com Ed is willing to pay for advertising and publicity and teachers in Com Ed are willing to visit credit classes to make announcements and to market Com Ed classes.


Consent Agenda

a)       To Approve Governance Committee appointments

Š          Senator Adair volunteered to sit on Planning Committee


Petitions Committee and Academic Standards Policy (Early)

Š          Senator Adair made a Motion to approve the petitions committee policy and procedure

Š          Part of academic standards is revisions of policy and procedures.

Š          Academic Standards and Revisions Committee should hold off on policy and procedure development until we have the templates and legal jargon needed to revise these policies and procedures from the Gold Book revision team.

Š          The templates will be done by the end of March.

Š          However, the Title V areas must be changed immediately.

Š          Bernie Blackman, head of the Gold Book Revision team, stated that if a priority item comes up, the team can research it but that they would rather maintain their original course in order to expedite the entire revision process. If committees wait for the work of the Gold Book team to be completed, the entire process will be more efficient. There is value to getting the information to these committees before the committees work on their own revision process.

Š          This motion will be voted on in a future agenda

Academic Renewal Policy

Š          Senators discussed that this policy should also wait for the Gold Book Revisions to be completed so as to make this revision process more efficient.

White Paper Recommendation (Wilson)

Š          Senator Wilson submitted a draft of Program Review recommendations to the AS.

Š          The draft was submitted as part of the minutes and will be filed as part of the permanent record.

Š          The document compares and contrasts the current Discipline Review format with a programmatic self-study assessment, more commonly referred to as Program Review.

Š          The document also outlines best practices to adopt during the initial phases of Program Review at CoM.

Š          Recommendation is to discontinue discipline review unless there is some relevance to course, certificate, or degree approval.

Š          Discipline review should be replaced by Program Review which would have a section relevant to curriculum which would go to Curriculum Committee

Š          Phase I and II of program review would not be doing this new process if approved, since they’ve already completed their reviews

Š          IPC would disperse these program review reports to the proper committees.

Š          Recommendations: “Disciplines would be better served by utilizing the acumen of their peers to validate their requirements as priorities within the appropriate committees—allowing those that can evoke change based upon equity and need, to do so.

Š          Senator Gaiz advised that the AS takes these recommendations to Admin for the development of a possible Program review Committee to help move these recommendation forward.

Š          Proposed Blueprints and existing blueprints could work to schedule block courses for each department to attract specific students.

Š          These issues will be a discussion item for the next meeting.

Requests to Address the Senate on Non-Agenda Items

Š          No requests


Meeting adjourned at 2:00
Minutes submitted by Schreck