Two adjunct senators were “seated,” based on a recent election among IVC
adjuncts. Karla and Melody received the most votes, I think. Two others were
identified as alternates.
Visitors (to this meeting) included K Greiner, L Fontanilla, G Roquemore (he
left after a bit), and D Gatewood (he came late). Administration really likes
to keep tabs on Senatorial doings.
Our friend and colleague Melanie H announced participatory possibilities
re one of those Komen Race for the Cure events. It’s hard to say no to
Mel.
Senate Vice President Bob U informed the group that one of our
colleagues has been ill and is running out of sick days. A mechanism will soon
be provided to permit donating sick days. For some reason, it was too
early to identify the colleague.
The student senator (seems like a nice kid), speaking on behalf of students,
expressed a desire to become better informed regarding the possible “plus and
minus grades” change. (I gather that the chief argument against the change to
create a +/- option is that it will have negative consequences for some student
GPAs.)
A colleague representing the Career Center solicited faculty involvement “to
promote your program” at or re the Center. Contact “Kay”: kmcdonald18@ivc.edu x5431. I think we’ll be receiving
an email about that.
During School reports, this exchange occurred:
K: “And the School of Humanities?”
R: “We are particularly disgruntled.”
K: “What about?”
R: “That will be revealed in time.”
Tracy F of Political Science/Social Sciences informed the group that her School
is pursuing a new interdisciplinary program, to be called “Global Studies.”
Such programs are often called “International Studies.”
A woman came up to discuss SLOs and their importance in “program review,” but
I’m afraid I just didn’t listen to her. She seemed nice.
There was some reference to some recent event at which ACCJC (Association of
Community Colleges and Junior Colleges, aka “the Accreds”) staff
explained SLOs, etc., but they were very unprepared, useless. It was
“disappointing,” said Kathy.
Nobody seemed surprised or particularly concerned.
I asked if, given recent controversies and complaints, there will be a shake-up
among ACCJC leadership. Kathy said that she was under the impression that ACCJC
Prez Babs Beno would likely step down at some point.
There is a California community college organization named FACCC (Faculty
Association of California Community Colleges, natch; see http://faccc.org/)
that has been kicking around the idea of a workaround of ACCJC re
accreditation. (I’m not sure I understood this. It was something like that.)
You’ll recall that our own Bill Hewitt (now retired, allegedly)
was the Pres of FACCC for a while. (They guy just won’t go home.)
Kathy mentioned that prospects for San Francisco City College have improved of
late. You’ll recall that the ACCJC, in a notorious action, pulled SFCC’s
ticket. That yielded a remarkable shitstorm, involving national pols, among
others. In the end, all fingers pointed at Beno and the ACCJC. If good
teaching is happening at SFCC then why is this result allowed to occur? ‘Splain
that!
We got some sort of update regarding the IVC Foundation. I gather that a key
member of the Foundation (not the director, but one of the members, likely the
president) has in the past tended to exhibit some manner of cluelessness but
has now gone places and done things that have tended to clue him in some.
That’s good. So it sounds like good things, changes, are afoot at the IVC
Foundation.
I asked if the Foundation members are “happy with Foundation leadership,” by
which I meant, of course, the delightful and talented Mr. Richard Morley
(Executive Director of College Foundation). Kathy gave me some kind of cagey
answer: She said she can’t answer questions about personnel matters.
So I figure that Morley’s name is mud (or “Mudd”).
Somebody said something about the Early College Program, but, once again, I
tuned out. Whatever was said, nobody said anything about it. (And I mean that.)
I have grown tired, mighty tired, of reminding the Ac. Sen. President that
faculty have consistently opposed, and expressed skepticism about, the program.
Nevertheless, our college Pres keeps promoting it, feeding it, showin’ up for
photo ops. I should just paste an anti-ECP sticker on the wall and leave it at
that. I guess.
Somebody asked about the annual Foundation Banquet, and something was said in
response. (This meeting seemed particularly efficacious as an inducer of comas
or sleep. Ask anybody.)
Somebody raised questions about the “calendar” issue—in particular, those
complaints by those pesky Saddleback nurses about the proposed calendar. But
that’s a done deal now. The upshot is that Saddleback’s nurses (“those nine
nurses,” said somebody) were inconvenienced by the calendar and so they went to
Trustee Wright to wail and moan as per usual and he commenced meddling with the
process during a board meeting—but to no avail. The collegial process had
occurred and that’s that, Ratchet Boy. (Those nurses seem to think they’re
mighty special and so they piss off many of us. Naturally, there was no public
expression of peevishness thereof.)
Kathy or somebody announced that VPI Justice has settled on the dates for
summer school. Don’t know what they are, but they are settled. Ax ‘im, I guess.
There’s some committee (there’s always some committee) brainstorming about our
long-range tech needs. I think you can have “input,” as they say. I’m angling
for a mirror ball.
We got to the “board policies” item, but nothing of great moment was up for
approval. Here’s what we approved:
·
BP 3515 Reporting of Crimes (pg. 20)
·
AR 4030 – Volunteer Assistance
·
AR 4101(b) – Salary Placement for
Classified Leadership – Delete – (pg. 24)
·
AR 4101(a) – Salary Placement for
Administrators and Classified Managers (pg. 25)
·
AR 4201.4(b) – Reclassification of
Classified Management Personnel (Pg. 28)
·
BP4015 – Accommodations for Employees
with Disabilities (pg. 8)
For some reason, re AR4101b, I think, Kiana [aka wife of college prez] and her pals
were the only ones who voted no. They didn’t explain themselves. What’s that
about? Dunno. (Owing to the Brown Act, all votes are public and recorded.)
I must have asked (not sure) a question about the A400 issue. Kathy told us
that there was a move afoot to invite Director of Facilities, John Edwards, to
come to answer our questions. But Edwards’ supervisor (aka Pres. Glenn
Roquemore) said no, he’ll show up in Edwards’ stead. And Edwards called
in sick today. Kathy said something about how the “real reason” for all
this—well, “we’ll never know.”
Feel free to develop daft conspiracy theories about all this.
Maybe I got that all wrong. I was coming in and out of a coma, induced by
Kathy’s voice and the general proceedings.
There’s a move afoot to write or rewrite the Faculty Advisor Handbook. There
are committee members who somehow aren’t getting the drafts and such. SNAFU.
Item 12 was “IVC CTE and Economic Workforce Development (EWD).” According to
the agenda, “Corine Doughty, Dean of Instruction and Eco Workplace Devel’t will
provide an overview of CTE and Economic Workforce Development….”
Kathy simply noted that, once again, Corine didn’t show (to the meeting). So no
overview.
See how our
administration works? Eventually, we’ll totally forget about our original
carpage.
Item 13 was the Student Equity Plan. The draft is available if you want to read
it, comment on it, etc. The draft will be presented to the board at the next
board meeting (a week away). By all accounts, it is mind-numbingly long and
tedious.
Item 14 was “IVC Student Success and Support Program (SSSP) Plan.” According to
the agenda, “IVC’s SSSP Plan draft is presented to Academic Senate for Rep
Council’s review.”
I think we just smiled. I’m sure we did little else.
Item 15 is “Full-time Faculty Hiring Priority List Development.”
Some senators poked around the curious fact that we are hiring vocational
specialists (laser people, etc.) for ATEP. How did that get on the list? How
did it come about that we are hiring these people for a program when faculty
are supposed to be in charge of programs? Why are we hiring full-time people in
areas that are liable to change quickly, potentially rendering such instructors
trendistically challenged? Has curriculum been written for these technical
areas (yes and no, they said). Etc.
Kathy didn’t seem to be in the mood to discuss any of this. We weren’t getting
anywhere with our probing questions.
These ATEP positions were “Tier 3” hires provided by administrators, as per the
process. Administrators are charged with addressing pressing needs or
“something innovative”—hires that are not otherwise taken care of in the
faculty’s (senate’s) prioritization efforts.
Brittany and I think this whole business is pretty hinky. Well, I do
anyway.
Item 16 is “Scholarship Policies and Procedures.” I was prepared to request
that this matter be tabled, but Steve R beat me to the punch. Steve has a
document that critiques this new policy document relative to past senate
recommendations, etc. I hope to provide you with more info about “push-back”
(against this new policy document) later this week.
Item 17 is the notorious A400 Building Design Process. You’ll recall that that
process has produced much faculty consternation. Kathy explained that IVC Pres.
Glenn Roquemore wishes to avoid any conflict about this. He’s disposed to be as
cooperative as possible. (It was as if she was saying, “tell him what to do and
he’ll do it.”) As you know, there are efforts afoot (ask Karima) to work out
the issues and problems that have arisen in dealing with Mr. Edwards, et al.
Item 18 is Facilities and Maintenance Update: “Rep Council requests an update
from F&M regarding F&M staffing and campus cleanliness.”
Kathy yammered like she does about that for a while. She stated that part of
the problem here has to do with custodial vacancies but that “management,” too,
is a part of the problem.
Next meeting: we’ll discuss “district IT.”
--Senator Roy
Your (full-time)
senators:
·
Brittany Adams
·
Roy Bauer
No comments:
Post a Comment