December 3 meeting: "This is not trivial," he said. "We're in a crisis."

     SCHOLARSHIPS. An unfamiliar fellow said a few words about our troubled scholarship program. Yadda yadda yadda. Kathy S added some yaddas, emphasizing our obligation, as faculty, to “step up” to join the committees that review student applications. Recall that, last year, we brought it about that two of the three people on these review committees must be faculty. (This did not make classified happy. Kathy likes to remind them that "scholarship" has the word "scholar" in it.)

     EMPLOYEE CLIMATE SURVEY. I mentioned the curious fact that the district and colleges have done nothing to promulgate or discuss last year’s employee climate survey, which is scathing in all the predictable ways. Kathy S noted that the Accred Report process is a “crowbar” that will pry open the contents of that survey. You can run, but you cain't hide.

     Melanie, on behalf of Brooke, reported support for LGBTQ issues at the recent State Senate Plenary.

     Kathy mentioned yesterday’s presentations on “active shooter” situations. No details were reported.

     Positive news was offered re the Foundation and its new, expanded membership and its new leadership. Things are much improved, foundationwise.

     Accreditation is “chugging along.” Kathy reported Tod B’s comments this morning about a state meeting (CCLC meeting) he attended with the State Chancellor. Straw poll taken: 50% wanted to keep ACCJC but change its leadership. (You’ll recall that both Tod and Glenn refrained from supporting the Task Force’s recommendations re ACCJC, including the rec that we drop that agency as our accreditor. Meanwhile, our senate endorsed the recommendations.)

     I noted the fact that, during debate of this issue (re whether to endorse the Task Force’s recommendations), the faculty went one way (the only reasonable way, i.e., contra ACCJC) and our administrative leadership (Todd, Glenn) went the other way (essentially supporting ACCJC).
     As it turns out, that’s not quite accurate since, as I was informed, the Saddleback Senate did not  endorse the recommendations and instead maintained neutrality.

     Shame.

     We blew off the item re review of BPs and ARs, etc., since the committee hasn’t met.

     WEEKEND COLLEGE. Dean Traci F presented on the “Weekend College” proposal (see last meeting). WC would generate some FTES. How much? It would be a pretty “decent” revenue generator, she said. It would help with our problem with student headcount, namely, that we may fail to hit our “growth target.” We can survey our own students about this idea, said Traci or Kathy or somebody.
     Craig chimed in: we want to know whether students who are not here would find this program attractive (no such program operates in our part of the state). At the right scale, WC could be very feasible, said Craig. For a large group of students, said Craig, Sunday “is not their Sabbath. Saturday is." (No, he wasn't kidding.) Craig spoke of our “growth target” and how expanding WC would address that. He said we need to do more to “coordinate” this program.
     Kathy’s “sense” of things: we can start without a full-blown program and see how WC Junior goes. Traci chimed in to say, “yes, that’s what we have in mind.”

     Craig: we could market as we once did: theaters, radio. What about social media? We’ve done little there. We have little Twitter presence. “Diane is very open to [all] that,” said Craig. “Our enrollment has been flat two Falls in a row.” If we don’t get creative, we won’t hit our targets, thus losing $1.6 million. “This is not trivial,” said Craig, finally.

     The Liberal Arts Building is now scheduled to be opened in the Fall. So that’s good: more teaching space.

     You’ll be hearing lots more about enrollment management. In some areas, the only things holding us back is lack of rooms and instructors. Weekend College “is just another niche in providing enrollment.”

     Craig: many IGETC courses are highly impacted and we can easily increase sections of those.

     Kathy: perhaps we as a body (the Senate) can act to support a proto-Weekend College as a start. Motion: “Rep Council strongly supports going forward with this project (with adequate marketing).”
     I controlled both of our School's votes (Brittany was out of town) and I decided to split our vote down the middle. You know, like Solomon, but without the blood.

     Craig: we’ve got to grow, not just maximize things as they are (some such sentiment). We’re in a crisis.

* * *

Craig: "We're in a crisis"

     It seems clear that administration wants to pursue the Weekend College idea. NOTE WELL: In the past, questionable programs have been pursued and faculty have essentially been powerless to stop them (e.g., Early College). That's the pattern under Prez Roquemore. We should be very clear whether we want to take this WC path. Later, I doubt that we’ll be able to reverse gears. The Senate’s vote today gave administration pretty much what they wanted (though there were 3 negative votes, including, oddly, Kiana T's).

     Craig: I will continue to nag chairs to add courses that get filled up.

     FINAL SCHEDULE SNAFU. Kathy asked Craig to update us on the final schedule issue. Craig: the long and short of it: any changes to the current, published schedule have been retracted. We're going with the original schedule, OK? Still, there are some conflicts. Changing the schedule to fix conflicts is “inappropriate,” said Craig. About 50 classes have conflict issues. I will contact faculty to solicit info about these conflicts. The reason conflicts are inevitable, said Craig, is that not all classes use the block scheduling (e.g., some 8-week courses, etc.).
     You can join the group that is working on this issue. Contact Craig. Kathy’s in charge of it, I think.

     CALENDAR RECOMMENDATION MADE. Item 11: calendar. Have you heard from your faculty about the five proposed calendars? (I haven’t, not from anyone in my own School.)
     We discussed Fall first. One of the ideas had all of Thanksgiving “taken off.” (I.e., no classes that week.) D1 and D2 are the same for the Fall. D3: half a week off Thanksgiving week.  Finals start on the 13^th-19^th. D4 the same. Three arrangements for Fall, then. Also: day off day before Thanksgiving.

     Motion: D1 for the Fall. I split Hum’s vote. The motion got 13 votes (vs. 11) but a motion must receive 14 to pass.

     Someone moved in favor of D5 for the Fall. Wednesday before Thanksgiving a “contractual day.” We voted. Again, I split Hum’s vote.  Result: 14 to 10. So our body recommended D5 for Fall. (Not a done deal; it’s just our recommendation!)

     Now Spring. D5 and D6 have the same Fall. President’s weekend a 4-day. Final’s start on the 16^th. Etc. The discussion seriously got into the weeds. Motion for D6; that turned out: 14, 9, 1. So we’re recommending D6 for the Spring. (And since D5 and D6 are the same for the Fall, we’ve chosen D6.)

     Got it? D6 it is.
     See: D6

     PLANNING AND DECISION-MAKING MANUAL. We looked at proposed changes. We saw “participatory governance decision making process flowchart.” This was a sticking point. The issues here were mind numbing. Where shall the arrows go? And the boxes?

     Early College Advisory Task Force membership: change made. Traci: a huge task force and members never showed. So it has been streamlined. One semester meeting.

     Passed by a wide margin.

     WHENCE EARLY COLLEGE RECOMMENDATIONS? I asked about the Senate’s recommendations for changes in the Early College program, put forward last Spring. These included the notion that all EC colleges should be taken at IVC, among our regular student population. Kathy: Some high schools have essentially adopted our recommendations, but Beckman is adamant that they love the program the way it is and they don’t want these changes. (Said Kathy: our recommendations "arrived" just as the college signed a contract with the high schools, so that was one difficulty with our recs.) Kathy assured me that our recommendations are not “dead.” At the very least, we’ll make an effort to persuade the high schools of the wisdom of those recommendations (e.g., having all courses at IVC). Craig said that the “new dean” with oversight will be considering and discussing these recommendations in Spring. Motion passed by wide margin.

     FACULTY HIRES. Craig: We’re going forward with “no fewer than 11 hires” at IVC. Our FON numbers are OK. (Not so at Saddleback?) We were supposed to get state funding for additional hires. Basic Aid districts were excluded from money. But if we emulate the state model (via district allocations), we might get the money anyway.
     Oh good.

Teddy, cat

Nov. 19 Senate Meeting: the fall of the House of Beno

     The agenda can be found here.

     A student, representing student government, asked for faculty volunteers to participate in a “group event” at the upcoming Talent Show. It’s probably something really stupid. Interested?
     The new Foundation Director (Elissa Oransky?) spoke. She seems nice. She reported that they’ve adopted a new program or system for scholarship data, replacing the hideous old STARS system. (This elicited some cheers.) Evidently, the new system is popular among community colleges. So there’s that.

     They’re looking for VOLUNTEERS for THE APPLICATION REVIEW COMMITTEE (I think). The committee must be at least 50% faculty, you’ll recall.

     Senate Prez Kathy S provided an update on FACULTY HIRES. A list of new IVC hires was approved by the board. Here’s where our prospective hires appeared on the list: 

   3. English/basic skills instructor

   13. Humanities

   14. Philosophy

   15. English/basic skills

     I think one School high on the list deferred a position (reading?). We don’t yet know how many of these positions will actually go forward.

     At IVC, one must live with uncertainty.

Oransky

     Kathy reported recent events re our accrediting body, the much despised ACCJC, headed by the secretive Barbara Beno. A few weeks ago, at the Senate Plenary, our local senate’s contingent presented a resolution (before the state senate) challenging the ACCJC to defend its reliance on the discredited philosophy behind SLOs. As occurred at the Spring Plenary, the gathering rejected the resolution, this time on even more absurd grounds: (1) sponsors did not cite any study (we were dinged for doing exactly that last spring); (2) gosh “we’re tired of talking about SLOs.”

     I have always believed that the state senate is worthless.

     Meanwhile, there’s been an effort to round up letters in support of the recommendations (including cutting loose the ACCJC as CCs’ accrediting body) from a task force put together by the Board of Governors or the State Chancellor’s Office. You’ll recall that the Our Fords—i.e., Prez Roquemore and Prez Burnett—refused to support such a letter on the grounds that the Task Force failed to consult with CEOs (this appears to be flat false).

     Our senate, you’ll recall, wrote a letter in support of the Task Force recommendations. We were pretty enthusiastic about them. Makes you proud.

     In any case, on Monday, the Board of Governors of the state Community College system voted unanimously to cut ACCJC loose as the accrediting body for California community colleges!

     I asked: will WASC [Western Association of Schools and Colleges] (the umbrella body) now construct a replacement agency or will an independent agency be created?

     –Don’t know. The task force’s recommendations urged that California’s CCs just join WASC and be accredited by that body (which accredits 4-year institutions).

     I asked about the length of the transition from ACCJC to whatever replaces it. “Could be 10 years,” said Kathy. But we really don’t know. It's anybody's guess.

The Ear is back!

     VP Bob Urell (he of the impressive salary) reported that we are working hard on the college’s budget. Unfortunately, our enrollment is now flat. That’s not good, since, 2% growth was projected/expected. Upshot: we’re in danger of losing as much as a million bucks should we fall short of our target.
     Consequently, there’s some scrambling to reverse the situation. It’s the IVC way.

     For instance, we’ll be beefing up “outreach” at the feeder high schools (we’ve been relying on the solitary Ann Akers; she’ll get assistance).

     Unfortunately, IVC lacks the party reputation of OCC, and that hurts us. Our great transfer rate is not so shiny a bauble, it seems.

     Maybe more bouncy houses? 

     International enrollments are suddenly down (not just flat). How come? Don’t know. We’re exploring the causes, said Bob. As you know, we recently hired a full-time director or something, and so this really blows.

     NOTE WELL: the VPI has announced a change in philosophy. When a course hits the 85% enrollment mark in (early?) enrollment, the VPI will urge us to add another section immediately.

     Where will we put these added courses? We’re contemplating adding PORTABLES out at the (largely unused) basketball courts—at a cost of about $60-70K. Sounds expensive, but not when you consider the potential cost to us if we don’t meet our target (of 2% growth).

     Faculty are urged to participate in outreach to attract more students. If there’s anything you can do or if you just want to help, then contact Ann or Mikiko at Outreach and Community Relations.

     Another idea being contemplated: WEEKEND COLLEGE. More about  that momentarily.

Sunny, cat

     Among the more interesting policies or regulations that came up for discussion was the one governing INDEPENDENT STUDY. Traci Fahimi (aka, “her deanship”) presented proposed changes made to the policy.

     Traci was also called upon to present/explain the WEEKEND COLLEGE (WC) idea. There are a few half-baked Weekend College programs around the state, but very few that seek to offer all courses needed to satisfy IGETC (etc.) requirements. (That’s us.) Evidently, there’s a big (successful?) program in Austin (Texas, I assume), and we might want to take a gander at that.

     A WC would involve courses offered late Friday afternoon through Sunday. A typical schedule would be, Sat and Sun, 9-12, then 1-4, and then at night. If we do this thing (attempting to attract that demographic that can’t attend during the week but that seeks an AA degree or transfer or a certificate), we’ll have to commit for years (as per Early College). It can’t be a one-time thing that we immediately drop like a bad habit.

     Support, on the weekend, could include such things as child care, health facilities, etc.

     Traci F seemed excited about the prospect. So was Bob, though he urged us to go slowly and carefully. Success in such a program, he said, depends on “support,” and there’s no guarantee that this thing will be supported sufficiently to work. Some have noted that, as it is, the college fails to support the NIGHT PROGRAM, which is half of what we do.

     There would be definite pluses to pursuing such a program. For instance, our increased room usage would put us in a better position to ask for new buildings. We can be a leader in something important—we can be the only game in town, etc. The start-up costs should be relatively low, and, if it works at all, it will help with our flat enrollment difficulty, where we stand to lose as much as $1 million.

Flow chart

     A motion to approve exploration of this idea was made. Traci wanted something stronger—she already wants to schedule for Fall 2016—but that’s what we went with.

     WE WERE URGED TO DISCUSS THIS PROPOSAL WITH MEMBERS OF OUR SCHOOL.

     We didn’t have time to discuss Calendar options, so we put that off until next meeting. (See D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, and D6.) PLEASE EXAMINE THESE OPTIONS.

     We put off discussion of the Early College program.

     A nice looking gal stood up and discussed all things technological. There’s some group and she’s hoping for faculty volunteers to join the dang thing. Any interest?

     There’s been work on the Planning and Decision-Making Manual. As things stand, there’s an official flow chart showing SPAC (a group that includes significant faculty representation) making recommendations straight to the COLLEGE PREZ, and the PEC, the President’s Executive Committee (VPs and no faculty), is indicated as a consulting body. That looks pretty good, I guess. Evidently, someone (i.e., Glenn) is urging adoption of a chart in which SPAC recommends to PEC, and then PEC recommends to the COLLEGE PREZ, which pretty much leaves faculty out of the loop.

     “That sucks,” said Kathy, essentially.

     We’re supposed to bring this back to our school. THAT’S YOU. Got an opinion? Let us know.

     Kathy (or somebody) also said something about how, from now on, any communication with the Publication Office must cc the dean. Or something. People were groaning about that but they were also packing up and half way out the door. So maybe I didn’t get that quite right.

Oct 29 meeting of IVC Ac. Senate: which calendar do you want? (Plus: who does the PIO think she is?)

     Blah blah blah [See highlighted elements below.]

     Senate Prez Kathy Schmeidler said that there may be an issue concerning the ballyhooed floor devices that are supposed to permit locking out “active shooters,” etc. We’ll get back to you on that.

     Roopa Mathur said a few things about online instruction. I didn't listen. Any questions about Canvas or Blackboard? (No.) Ask Roopa, if you're interested in that debate. (What debate?: The district is contemplating abandoning Blackboard in favor of the cheaper—and better?—Canvas. Roopa's a good egg. Do not hesitate to contact her.)

     Accreditation: K: we’re moving along swimmingly with Accreditation. 72 people are on one workgroup, if you can believe it. Lots of faculty representation. Blah blah blah. It’s helpful and important to have both experienced and naïve people on these committees. Really. So join.

     CTE (Career Technical Education): there is now a committee, but it is struggling. Low attendance. Pretty dreary.

     Steve R expressed concern about modifications in field trip forms and requirements. He's pretty frustrated. In the course of discussion, Kathy opined that, at IVC, we grumble about the rules but follow them; at Saddleback, however, they do not grumble, but they do not follow the rules. (I noted with amusement that Saddleback's new Ac. Senate Prez was visiting us today.)
     Apparently, there’s much unclarity (opacity, confusion) about the rules for fieldtrips. The  district needs to get its act together. Don't hold your breath.

Curriculum:

     We approved this lot.

Item 6: review of board policies and ARs

     We deleted 4201 (Reclassification of Classified Management; in respect of classified managers’ worries; they haven’t had a chance to review it). Approved the rest

Teddy Boy

Items 22, 23:

Student Equity Plan (SEP)

Student Success and Support Program Plan (SSSP)

     VP Fontanilla droned forth like she does. She never has anything to say. 24 people on Taskforce this year. 52 requests for funds. 24 approved. 11 were funded. Blah blah blah. Want feedback on “the plan.” (See below.)

     Kathy: will need feedback from this body. Plan only came out last night. See: Student Equity Plan (SEP)

     Janet Somebody: blah, blah, blah, blah

     Kathy: we want to cancel next Thursday’s Rep Council meeting, since it interferes with the State Senate Plenary. But the BOT meeting is coming up soon, on the 16th of Nov (owing to conflict with Thanksgiving). So we need to make special arrangements. Steve moved something to that effect. Okey-dokey.

Item 18. Academic Senate Resolution to Affirm Credit ESL

     Rebecca of ESL spoke to this. Both credit and non-credit ESL courses are now being funded. This is a call to continue to fund credit ESL, since such funding is getting lost. A state-wide issue, not really an IVC thing.  We voted to support the res.

Item 16: Student Extracurricular Activities Transcript

     Funds were requested and allocated to support the development of a Student Extracurricular Activities Transcript that will serve as a supplement to the academic transcript and be an official record of students' significant accomplishments outside the classroom.

     Shall the Representative Council affirm its support for the development of this Student Extracurricular Activities Transcript, and establish a workgroup comprised of interested faculty, staff, and administrators, with Kay Ryals as the convening chair?

     Kay Ryals spoke to this. Seeking faculty support and buy-in. Looking for participants. Looking for Workgroup and staff. This sort of thing is uncommon, though more colleges are on board.

     Vote: unanimous approval

Coming soon

Item 12: ASCCC Resolution

     Whereas, In the last 15 years, new attempts to track the success of school systems around the world (e.g., PISA) have achieved impressive bodies of data useful in measuring the effectiveness of education approaches; and

     Whereas, These data indicate that the more successful countries do not embrace the notion of “measurable student learning outcomes” that are central to the ACCJC’s existing standards for evaluating and reviewing institutions and the philosophy that emphasizes that tool; and

     Whereas, It continues to be the case that research fails clearly to establish that continuous monitoring of course-level SLOs results in measurable improvements in student success at a given institution but does engender frustration that continues to characterize community colleges’ attempts to implement the SLO approach;

     Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges request that ACCJC justify its continued implementation of SLOs and explain why it does not opt for approaches more consistent with the [more successful] approaches of successful countries in education their students.

     We modified the res a bit to maximize the chances of is acceptance at the Plenary. The new res was passed unanimously. At the Plenary, it will be further massaged and then passed.

Item 10: 2015-2016 Academic Calendar

     We viewed these proposals:

C1 

C2 

C3

     Two major questions; full week of Thanksgiving or half a week of Thanksgiving? 2^nd…

     We looked carefully at C2. Change: Spring break starting on the 11^th instead. And have “a dead day.” (Not about Fall.) Motion to make that change and approve that part of the calendar failed (partly because some of us want to consult with our faculty).

     Please let us know what you want! See C1, C2, and C3 above.

Budget report:

     Bob U: $66 million in requests.
     Kathy: Requests first go through the appropriate unit (School or whatnot). The unit rates according to a rubric: essentially, how desperate is the need? Then, chairs of all Strategic Planning committees get together and sort these. Requests rated according to same rubric. That takes time. Meanwhile, Davit (budget guy) makes guess of which funding sources might fund things. A checkerboard chart is thus created. Complicated.

Item 19: Publications and Faculty Prerogative

     Periodically flyers and announcements are sent campus wide implying that faculty members might be offering extra credit for attendance. This is clearly a 10+1 issue. [See graphic.]

     Shall the Representative Council make a clear and decisive statement regarding faculty prerogatives with regard to extra credit?

     Kathy: This was added by PIO to the above ad: “Ask your instructor about extra credit for attending a workshop.” Not appropriate. The PIO should have questioned that part of the flier. At other times, she questions elements inappropriately. (A pattern.)
     Let’s have a larger discussion—about the PIO and control over all college publications, such as fliers, etc. Don’t have time today.
     Steve: asking innocent questions produces “slapback” from Oaks/Roquemore This sort of thing is getting to be pervasive, says Kathy. Wants an open discussion about this in future.

    —I should mention that, after the meeting today, I was accosted by Saddleback College's new Ac. Senate Prez, who introduced himself. He seems like a nice guy. (He's "new," he said, and yet he's the senate prez. I shot him a look: you poor fool.) He explained that he was a big fan of a certain blog that shall remain nameless. I noted that Lisa A and I have been putting that out for years and I indicated that I appreciated his appreciation.
     So there's that.

Oct 15 meeting of the Academic Senate

Student participating in the Great Shakeout today.

Oct 15 meeting of the Academic Senate

     Melanie H mentioned an article in the Chronicle of Higher Education—about cheating and the efficacy of “assigning seats.” Check it out.

     Also: she offered her pitch for the Susan G. Komen anti-breast cancer stuff. Thanks, Diana H, for your contribution, she said. 
     Next event: “bingo for boobies.” Only $25. Raffle.

     Student Success and Support Program (officer). Blah, blah, blah. Additional funding this year. Robert M. spoke in support, so there’s that.

Executive reports:

     Kathy S: murmurous blather about enrollment management and who or what should do that. She also spoke about scheduling process and info. (Factoid: the Almanac of old has turned into “Inform.”) Spoke about prospect of better data about schedules. One faculty member is invited to a “BPA” (whatever that is). Anyone interested? Sounds like Kathy will attend if no one else steps up. Related to enrollment management, but “not exactly the same.”

     Bob U: resource requests due “soon.” Still working on Budget. Davit presented a “preliminary 5-year plan” at a recent meeting. Sounded pretty dicey. Bob glanced at the plan and it looked dire, but who knows. Tomorrow, a Barc and a Drac meeting (Basic Aid allocation and District Resources allocation).

     Brett M: Ac Affairs had a “talkative” meeting this week. Cheating and the classroom measure: upcoming “photo rosters.” Paper work for field trips (fear of increased number of forms). Issue of cleanliness of some of the A-buildings.

     Steve R: blah, blah, blah. No, there won’t be more forms; they’ll be reconfigured. They [who?] want to “streamline.”

     Brett: looking for “something different” for professional development week. That inspired an outré joke, but I didn't catch it. Classified Senate is asking for faculty participation—maybe museum tours. Theme: “discovering Southern California.” They want to encourage mixing of faculty and classified.

     Complaints about cleanliness of restrooms in B200. Brittany: those restrooms like 7-11 restrooms. That got a laugh. How come Brittany knows so much about such zones? Dunno.

     Diana H: we need to get our “Carnegie unit act together.” In future, we’ll have to include statements of hours of homework per lecture hour. Supposed to be two. You might have to make outside-of-class activities “more robust,” she said.

     Recently, Tiffany gave a presentation on “native GE patterns.” We should ask: if a student is compelled to take course C, does that really contribute to their “general education”?

     D went to OC Business Association luncheon. Went to CTE workshop too. Tell students: employees (?) want kids to take Writing 1 and 2, Excell, Word, etc. Also on Saturday at CTE regional workshop: State throwing money at getting people ready for workplace. 25 suggestions about how to do that better, I guess. CTE people should get more involved. If we don’t get our acts together, money will go elsewhere. A window has opened to change how this money is spent. Get involved. So said Diana.

     Kathy S: there’s a Faculty Association meeting this evening about the contract. If the proposed contract is ratified, it can be up for approval at the next BOT meeting.

     Also: Claire (Pres of the union) tells us: Chancellor’s Office task force recommends that we should consider moving accred to WASC rather than ACCJC (WASC is the main entity of which ACCJC is the community college branch). Our Board and Chancellor won’t be writing letters in support of this rec. Our college Presidents are skeptical of it. Distrustful of Chancellor’s Office task force. The problem: they didn’t ask for our input as they claim. Concern expressed also: will the ACCJC punish those who pursue this (if ACCJC survives this)? Should we support this task force’s recommendation?
     “Grow a spine,” I said.
     We couldn’t vote on it since it was not agendized. Likely will be agendized next time.

Item 6: BPs and ARs (review process)

     Some discussion of BP/ARs for academic renewal, repetition, credit by examination, independent study. You’ll recall that there was much discussion about some of these issues months ago. Craig J chimed in about concern that students are gaming the system (repeating courses), etc. Hence, new regulations. Steve had lots of questions about the repeatability reg.
     I fell into a deep coma.

Item 7: grievance pool.

     Any interest to join the grievance pool? We need volunteers! Send name to asenate. Melanie H knows most about such service. A veteran.

Item 10: Academic calendar

     Miriam C, who is on the committee, showed a slide of proposed Ac Calendar, 2017-2018. (See links below.)

     Complaints: please reduce # of flex days, etc. Please start semesters when other colleges do. Much concern about negative impact of unusual early start dates. Committee addressed that and also equalized days per each semester (83/83).

     Complaint: when students have Thur and Fri off, then they don’t show up on Wednesday, etc. Thus put contractual days (there are three) strategically in weeks of holidays. Creates a week off in Fall. Etc.
     Miriam was presenting two proposals--very similar--and their relative advantages/disadvantages. Bob U and Miriam got into a dispute over this (Bob and his people insisted on the second version). Very entertaining 'cause Miriam don't back off no how. Generally speaking, I don’t think it’s ever a good idea to contradict Miriam C.
     Craig and Steve chimed in. Don’t know what that was about. People sure do have opinions and wants and needs, boy. They love to carp and spew.

     Diana: don’t want whole week of Thanksgiving off ‘cause students will become brain dead, yadda yadda. That’s not my experience! said some. Students come back from break "refreshed," like daisies.

     Listening to Miriam speak pains my mind. But I like her. She’s fierce.
     Schools should discuss these versions. (See below.)

D1 http://inside.ivc.edu/committees/asenate/Meetings/2015-16/15-10-15/17-18%20IVC%20Calendar%20v1.pdf

D2 http://inside.ivc.edu/committees/asenate/Meetings/2015-16/15-10-15/Holidays%202017-18%20v1.pdf

D3 http://inside.ivc.edu/committees/asenate/Meetings/2015-16/15-10-15/17-18%20IVC%20Calendar%20v2.pdf

D4 http://inside.ivc.edu/committees/asenate/Meetings/2015-16/15-10-15/Holidays%202017-18%20v2.pdf

Item 13: the Pathways Project

See

http://inside.ivc.edu/committees/asenate/Meetings/2015-16/15-09-17/PathwaysProjectDescription81215.pdf
     An excerpt:

     A decade of intensive focus on improving student success in community colleges has produced notable effects: a dramatic increase in awareness of the challenges and in commitment to college completion as a critical goal; a sea change in the use of data to assess and monitor student success and institutional performance; a growing body of evidence regarding effective educational practice in community colleges; and increasing numbers of institutions that are putting that knowledge into practice and demonstrating encouraging results. These promising developments can be attributed to the unprecedented efforts of a collection of philanthropies, national organizations, state systems, and institutions that have worked both collectively and individually to investigate practice, implement change, and produce results.
     Now, there is a striking convergence of research and lessons of experience, as these people and their organizations have come to the shared understanding that progress, while evident in some places, is too slow; that the favored solutions of the past decade, while often necessary components of change, do not adequately address the magnitude of the challenges community colleges and their students face; and that typically, the changes thus far achieved have not been fundamental enough—and certainly not scaled enough—to achieve the improvements in completion of college credentials with strong labor market value, especially among low-income students and students of color, that are necessary to reclaim the American Dream. …

Craig H seemed to have the job of advocating our participation in this silly series of seminars (twice a year for three years). He had lots of buzz words. “We’d gain a national perspective.” Blah, blah, blah. “Student intake,” “completion rate,” etc. Buzz, buzz, buzz.

     Melanie expressed skepticism about measuring student success. Brittany drew attention to reference (above) to “labor market value.” Kathy S advocated that we participate. We voted: 17 for, 4 against. So we've approved this dang thing. (Brittany and I voted agin it.)

     Technology Advisory Task Force: woman spoke. Blackboard is coming out with a new improved version. Training sessions, etc. Word documents, files, etc. Monday, 10-noon.

Item 14: next time. 15: budget. We got a version from Bob.

Item 16: full-time hiring priority list.

     We don’t have the FON (Faculty obligation number). Frustrating.

     Melanie: reading is on the list.

Item 17: emergency, safety

     [Emergency call] Response time issue: Chief Glenn provided data, says Kathy. Sometimes pretty long. Why the delay?

     Kathy discussed plan to put a device in each room that allows locking the door from inside, etc. Some gizmo will enable disengagement of device. Go to A123 (conference room) to see that.

     Check out this page:

http://www.ivc.edu/resources/police/Pages/EmergPrep.aspx
    —Lots of info about various emergencies and such.
     Spoke with Mel on the way out. Told her she was fierce. "That's a good thing, isn't it?" I said.

October 1, 2015 meeting of the Academic Senate (Rep Council)

President Kathy Schmeidler absent today. Bob Urell filling in. [Kathy showed up at about 3:30]

Melanie H once again made her pitch for the Susan G. Komen walk event. “There are five of us walking 60 miles.” Melanie displayed pink shirts, etc. Chocolate too. Wanna sponsor?

The “Alternate media specialist” spoke, explained what she does. (She produces alternate media for students.) Making websites accessible to students.

Student government crew of three: one kid apologizes for being “unprofessional” (emotional) at the last meeting. As I reported, there were tears. These are some seriously callow “yute,” boy.

Bob: state senate “plenary” coming up soon. Want to attend? We have funding for that.

     Brittany asked how the schedule of courses at ATEP comes about. Seems like very little or no consultation with departments. Craig answered: chairs and deans put this together.  They responded to: IGETC concerns, time required to drive to (or from) IVC, etc.
     The new building will open in 2017. Etc.
     Okey-dokey, then.

Holiday Party Planning committee met this morning. Two dates to consider for event: Dec 3 or 9? (Thursday and Wednesday). 

Brooke just launched a LGBTQ Resources website (see under students, resources at IVC website). She’d love any feedback. See here:
http://students.ivc.edu/lgbtq/Pages/default.aspx

Brittany mentioned the “book-burning” event (today) at the Library and last week’s mural unveiling event (Emigdio Vasquez mural), which was a great success, well attended. I noted that, years ago, we discussed book-burning with Glenn and convinced him that we ought to be agin it.

Cheryl D: institutional SLOs, blah blah blah. Don’t attach SLOs to your CORs [outlines of record]—we’ll just have to do it over again, when we figure out how to attach the SLOs.

CTE (career, technical education) taskforce. Blah blah blah.

Safety and security: the “great shakeout” (earthquake awareness, preparedness) event will occur soon.

Skipping ahead to item #18: Basic Skills Initiative

Summer Serpas presents re Basic Skills Initiative

     Yesterday, we submitted the state report. Expenditure plan. Spending report. All available at IVC website. You can request BSI money. $1000 per person, for now. Be sure to include notes that you are requesting for BSI. Supplemental form: professional development, etc. We’re part of the resource request process. Use the regular resource request form. Ultimately, you’ll come to the BSI workgroup to attain approval. Discussed the “basic skills cohort tracker” and how it works, how to access it.
     Summer expressed her conviction that our efforts are yielding results.

Item 9: student club advisor handbook.

Nothing ready.

Item 12 – SLO challenge to ACCJC

Nothing’s been sent to the senate yet. We'll continue this item. The state senate meeting is on the 17^th or thereabouts--gotta get input before then.

Item 13: Faculty professional development funding.

Committee has decided to increase amount for full time and correlative increase for part-timers (from $1400 to $1800 for full-timers). So $900 for part-time, i.e., 50% of full-timer rate.

I once again raised a colleague’s concern that there be an opportunity to apply later (than Fall), and we finally got through to Brett (McKim of Ac Affairs) about that. We’ll see what happens.

The Pathway project….
Will be continued

Item 15: internship program.

Santa Ana contract (for this program) available for viewing.

Item 16: Contract education, etc.

“We’ll have a presentation at the next meeting,” said Diana H.

Item 17: budget. Nothing new here. Stay tuned.

Item 19: Learning Management Systems decision-making plan.

     “Canvas” chosen as new system by ?. Saddleback College is part of the pilot program. But we’re a Blackboard district. So here’s a plan. This process involves testing Canvas and a period to decide whether to adopt Canvas (instead of Blackboard). Blackboard is very expensive; Canvas much less so. An important matter.  (Evidently, Canvas and Blackboard are “very comparable.”) Roopa seems to be a point person in this regard.

Item 20: full-time hiring priority list.

Craig Justice is asked to present.

1.     Japanese - vacant
2.     Dance - vacant
3.     English (Basic Skills) - new
4.     Biology - vacant
5.     Electrical Engineering - vacant
6.     Math - vacant
7.     Math - vacant
8.     English as SL - vacant
9.     Counselor (International) - vacant
10. Communication studies - vacant
11. Reading - new
12. Chemistry - vacant
13. English - new
14. Philosophy - new
15. English (Basic Skills) – new
16. Etc.

     Craig noted what the English department told them, that they have too many part-timers, etc. “Came up with a metric that’s fair.” We’ve got STEM covered, English covered, math covered. Recognized 11 positions; two of them already going forward.

     According to HR, if positions are already board approved, they are labeled “vacant.” If not yet board approved, then labeled "new." More authority on “vacant.” “New” positions require new board action.

     Craig: nine off of this list will be hired, though the whole list will be put to the board for approval. If there’s new funding, “communication studies” position will be first “out of the chute.” We are hoping to know how much money we’ve got soon. (Brittany and I spoke briefly with Craig after the meeting; he seemed to be optimistic about hiring further down the list to English and Philosophy.)

     The group discussed the prospect of “gaming” the system, and how difficult it is to do that under existing constraints. In general, we discussed the seeming phenomenon that some hires never seem to happen and it seems that there’s something wrong with the priority system. Craig and Kathy spoke in defense of the adequacy of our priority algorithm. We’re open to modifying the system. Come to the committee and make your case.

Executive reports:

Bob: we have not received the FON report yet. Rumors about additional money. “Millions or nothing.”

Kathy: State Senate is hosting a leadership conference Sat, Oct 10. You need to register for it….

Ac Senate is supposed to appoint someone to hiring committee for District Risk Management position (Earl Pagal, he of terminal “frog walk,” held that position, now vacant.) Anyone interested? Please give your name to Kathy.

That was about it.