Academic Senate Meeting


September 24, 2003

3:00 p.m. - BC214


Members Present: Barbara Bell, Susan Broderick, Gary Carroll, Jim Chesher, Esther Frankel, Jack Friedlander, Michelle Fulton, Tom Garey, Peter Haslund (Chair), Tom Mahoney, Kim Monda, Kathy O’Connor, Peter Rojas, Lana Rose, Jan Schultz, Sheri Shields, Bob Stockero, Sonia Zuniga-Lomeli.


Guest: Mangai Pitchai, The Channels




1.0      CALL TO ORDER


            1.1      Approval of Minutes – September 10, 2003 Meeting


pg #4 – Item 4.0 Delete “there was discussion of each Agenda item.”

            pg #3 – Item 3.1 – third bulleted item, replace “briefly” with “not”     

pg #5 – Item 5.3 Motion, insert after “policy”  “, which replaces District

  Policy #2520,”

            pg #5 – Item 5.2 Change “unanimous” to “1 nay  2 abstentions”


M/S/C Approval of the 9/10/03 Academic Senate meeting Minutes with corrections (Garey/Carroll) Unanimous.


            1.2      Approval of the Agenda – so approved




2.0      INFORMATION  (Announcements, Communications)


2.1      ESL/Foreign Languages Senator announced the Foreign Language Department’s formation of a new “School of Modern Languages”.  



3.0      REPORTS


3.1           President’s Report: 


Ø             An End to Anonymity!  See Senate bulletin board.

Photos of the Academic Senate are on display outside the Senate office A117, in the Administration Building.


Ø             Committee Assignments & Meeting Times

The information is updated regularly. The most current information can be obtained from the Academic Senate Office.  Concern: The new calendar is making it difficult for some who wish to participate in committee service.

Suggestion: Committees may need to reschedule their meetings to another day and time. 


All committees will be notified to review their schedule and make a decision by semester’s end if there are any changes to be made in the day and time they meet.


Ø             Issue Development and Assignment

The issue of overload – exceeding 21 TLUs, a complex issue, has emerged due to the substantial number of faculty exceeding this limit without formal approval.


P&R, AP and Committee on Teaching and Learning are being asked to review the issue with regard to the allocation of resources, possible modification of policy and pedagogy.


Questions and Comments were presented regarding the attached document “What is an Full Load” prepared by the Senate President.


The State Academic Senate and Curriculum Committee are looking at the lecture/lab item. Title V language has no clear language between lecture and lab activity for students. There are inconsistencies among community colleges between lab and lecture hours. There are compensation issues to be considered. What is a lecture, what is a lab? 


P&R will also work to develop criteria for budget reductions that represent faculty interests. Suggestion was made that AP might also review and develop criteria for such a possibility. Request: That both committees have an ongoing dialogue during this process with the Senate to bring up to date their ideas and thoughts as a work in progress. Suggestion: Request a joint meeting to encourage/promote conversation.   


Ø             Election of Adjunct Member of Senate

As there was only one formal nominee for candidate submitted to the Senate, it was suggested that this nominee be declared the winner.


A question was raised as to whether hard copy notifications had been delivered to adjunct faculty mailboxes, and since our efforts had relied on email communications, it was urged that we take one additional step in the process to insure fairness.


M/S To move the Report item “Election of Adjunct Member of Senate” to Action. (Garey/Rose)  Unanimous


3.2           EVP’s Report


Ø             Review of Announcement for New & Replacement Faculty, Fall ’04

The EVP is preparing to send out the standard “new and replacement faculty” letter to Department chairs and has requested the Senate’s informal input regarding the content of the letter. 


The EVP addressed the Senate’s concerns about ranking the approved replacements stating that ranking the replacement positions was not the intent of his request for input regarding the letter to Department chairs. From the Senate’s comments and suggestions the EVP has established what the letter should include.


Ø             FTES Projections for ’03-‘04

The projection is that FTES will be approximately 5% over cap at the current rate. Efforts are being made to reduce the amount of unfounded FTES by cutting FTES from the non-credit program and consolidating low enrolled credit classes offered in the Spring 2004 semester.


Ø             Budget Status

CPC will be asked to begin work on the development of the 2004-05 college budget.  The budget development process will be challenging in that  there are still many unknowns to be determined at the state level.


Ø             Response to concern re: minutes of 7-18-03.

The EVP stated that the Minutes are accurate.


            3.3      Liaison Reports


Request: Liaisons should apprise the Senate President if there is a report for presentation or if there is not.


The P&R liaison reported that the committee has begun to brainstorm possible criteria if budget cuts affect academic programs. The “What is a Load” will also be reviewed.


The CAC liaison reported the deadline for Fall 04 – All CAC changes are due October 20, 2003. The committee will be looking at Prerequisite issues during the spring semester.


Regarding Sabbatical Leave Committee – strong effort is underway to reinstate the approved leaves.  The one-year suspension of funding for sabbatical leaves is now up and deliberation/discussion of restoring the funding for leaves should begin.  Request for next meeting: have previous Minutes available for next meeting.


Comment: Notify Academic Senate Committee Chairs who their Senate Liaison is.


Request: Discuss the expectations of the Liaison.     






4.1          Should we rename this section, “New Business?”

No change recommended.


4.2          Defining “Committee Service”

What constitutes committee service? The question arose as we became aware that a small number of committees meet once or twice a year and others meet twice or more each month.  Discussion postponed.





5.1          Master Teacher Evaluation Procedure

M/S/C Remove the tabled motion (Garey/Carroll) Unanimous


The last two sentences in paragraph A should be reversed.

Peer = Any tenured faculty.


M/S/C Friendly amendment substitution: add the sentence “At his/her sole discretion the evaluatee may incorporate additional evaluation activities.” to B 1 as the last sentence. (Garey/Carroll)


M/S/C To adopt and approve the proposed language for the Master Teacher Evaluation Procedure as amended (Garey/Carroll) Unanimous


5.2          Election of Adjunct Member of Senate


The Adjunct Faculty Senator, Michelle Fulton, voiced concern about the need to reach all the Adjunct Faculty in the nomination process. 


M/S/C To direct the President of the Academic Senate to hold a formal election for Adjunct Faculty representative via traditional hard copy double envelope ballot (Garey/Schultz) Unanimous