These are my notes. They’re a bit sketchy, but you get the general
idea:
idea:
MARCH 2, 2017, meeting of the IVC Academic Senate, Rep Council
THEME: “we’re shiny, happy people and everything’s swell!”
See: AGENDA
June M, future Senate Prez, noted that many universities, etc., have declared themselves to be safe havens for immigrants. Discussion ensued among Senators, mostly supportive, of pursuing such a declaration, though VP of SS Linda F opined (if I understood her) that we ought to consider the issues and problems that attend such an action.
Natch.
We decided to make this a discussion item at the next meeting.
Executive reports:
Kathie (qua president):
Kathie presented some slides. Don’t know what that was about. I think it was supposed to be a funny presentation of whatever theme is plastered on these free mugs we’re getting. “Take charge – 10+1,” a reference to the Ac Senate’s zone of responsibility/expertise.
Accreditation:
We (IVC) got one recommendation for improvement. We’re in compliance, but could improve. It was some point about assessing SLOs. Or something.
The district had one rec for compliance, and it is more serious: HR and evaluation of folks.
Lots of commendations. Mentioned DRAC (District Resources Allocation), which is way transparent, they said. College/district were commended for everybody working well together. The #1 commendation: impressed by how cohesive the college is. Everybody is working together, everyone has eyes on the prize. (Shiny happy people.) They went on and on about it. Everybody participates, they said.
We participate through Ac Senate. Get your free mug if you haven’t received it already. Chirp, chirp.
Commendation for openness of resource requests process. Very open. Commendation for the path that we’re on.
We show “family”-ness, or something (some goofy Hawaiian word).
Nothing about distance ed. That’s good, said Kathy. If they don’t mention something, they’re happy with it.
Diane H: now that we got a pat on the back, let’s look at how we did SLOs in outlines. That was pretty messed up, as you’ll recall. Let’s not drop that issue.
Kathy: that will be a high priority for our senate under its new leadership. Hope we can have “productive and more thoughtful process” in how we approach these things. This is tied to the broad pathway stuff.
Kathy: we haven’t even decided, as a college, how we’re going to understand SLOs. Until we have that discussion at a high level, and decide on something, there’s no point working on the logistics, Diane. Let’s works with the band-aid we’ve got right now
The Accreditors like everything, so there’s no issue coming from them about our understanding of SLOs, etc. They didn’t say we have to change anything, they just said, “now do it better.”
The really important thing, of course, is what the Commission writes, and we won’t hear about that for months.
VP Bob U:
We (SPAC; strategic planning) haven’t met much because of Accreditation activities. We’ve received 500 resource requests. We’ll fund 2 mil out of categorical. Then we will turn to general funds (nothing available yet).
Brett (of Academic Affairs):
Process for professional development and fund recoup
We’re blessed; we have substantial money to offer for reimbursement. Not all community colleges do this for their faculty. We have a website—we’re making it work. Not streamlined, but it does work. Pre-approval request site. Takes us 2-3 days to go through this. Lately: accreditation has slowed us down.
Post activity approval: We need receipts, credit cards, etc. Show that things have been paid. Need those specific things asked for in emails. Next, Stef enters into Workday.
Posting to Workday. Need to wait for district to generate a check. 6-8 weeks. Not pretty. Asking: perhaps explain from a different angle. Here’s what I need you to go back with. Faculty have yelled at Stef on more than one occasion. Stop that!
We don’t usually get the right kinds of receipts the first time out. Documents have to show that the charge is paid. Brett and Co seemed genuinely miffed that some faculty “yell at Stef.”
Please follow instructions. Yell not at Stef. Please do the documents thing the way we’ve asked you to do it.
Let us know when or how our instructions could be improved. Work with us. #1 thing you can do to help: go through the instructions, follow them.
Chris L of curriculum:
IVC/SC course comparables list has been distributed. We need to respond to that. Tell Curric Committee Rep.
Revised course deadline: April 21 (for Fall 18/Spring 19)
New courses: August 25th.
Ballot for curriculum: blah blah blah
Board policies: nada
Reminder: Preview Day on Tuesday. Will be organizing with pathway clusters in mind. Pretty excited about that. (Can’t imagine why.)
Item 13: DE coordinator co-chair
Any nominations? Let us know.
Academic Calendar: Miriam can’t make it today. Workgroup could only come up with one idea (see here) that satisfied all criteria. Here it is. Bear in mind that every little change has often surprising ramifications. Lots of suggestions just don’t work.
Looked at proposal, projected on screen
Questions about Caesar Chavez day (not in compliance since 1995)
If you have a tangible suggestion, bring it, but be aware that it is difficult to make changes work.
The recommendation (not numerous, just one) was projected. See folder for today’s meeting.
District calendar meeting, next Thursday. Two of us will be able to attend.
https://inside.ivc.edu/committees/asenate/Meetings/2016-17/17-03-02/IVC%20Proposed%20Calendar2018-19_022317.pdf
Motion to approve: unanimous.
Let’s skip to #21.
Arleen Elseroad came before us. Blah blah blah.
Integration of SSSP-SEP-BSI
International students (#22)
Reserved seats for I students.
Christina Delgado, Dir of Inter program
These students must enroll in 12 units per semester
Owing to law, students can’t take tests until just 2 weeks before class (they’re restricted from arriving earlier). Not good.
A solution. Lowering caps, etc. Seats reserved for these students.
23: pathways logistics. Blah blah blah
Item 26.
Laser Week work group.
Bob U: discussed freakin’ Laser Week. Hold during flex week?
Item 25: residence requirements for … getting a certificate from IVC.
Ben came in to discuss this, December. Remember?
We had a robust discussion; came to no conclusion. Sent people back to their schools for further input, opinery.
Bob: we discussed it in Business. Not in favor of it (in business). We can’t insure that these students are proficient if they’ve taken their courses elsewhere.
Sent back to curriculum for revision.
Item 24: manual
Changed motion: left Diane Oaks part out (there was a change that essentially placed Diane on some important committee—PEC?—so that she could hold Glenn’s hand or something). She was added to the PEC, or whatever it’s called. We bracketed that part. Voted for the manual as such. (Sending a message to Glenn and Diane.)
Item 16: bylaws revision
Last day for nominations p and vp
Add to ballot bylaws revisions; now or never
We approved option 2 to be placed on ballot
No comments:
Post a Comment