Child Development Center #1
—Donna King of Human
Development spoke. Then:
Mary McDonough,
also of Hum Dev, spoke passionately and at length. Yes, we’re
in the red, but nobody paused for a brainstorming session to solve the
problems, try to run leaner, etc. Our Child Development programs absolutely
depend on the Lab/School, but the recommendation, all of a sudden, is to close
it.
Mary passionately
argued in favor of keeping the Center, and thus the program, and for attempting
to change it to turn things around financially. She implied that union rules
impose unwelcome restrictions in staffing, etc. But this program is important, she
said, for it trains lots people in the area.
Bob U: we’re
being told that the school is not used enough as a lab.
Response:
aren’t enough children at the center to justify a large number of adults/staff,
so the lab numbers are necessarily low.
Someone
mentioned a half million dollar shortfall.
Tracy F
spoke: desired data is available
Chris: degrees
are involved here. They require participation, application….
Ilknur: show
us the numbers! We need data.
Kathy
Schmeidler: no labs break even. Our Bio labs don’t break even.
We were
told, tons of competition in the area, so there are “no kids” at the center. So
you need to bring in a report showing the actual data.
Mary:
everything was balanced until the first pay increase [brought about by the
union], and then it all went south. “That’s the problem with being in a
unionized institution,” said Kathy. Whatya gonna do.
Kathy:
breaking even not a reasonable goal. But getting closer, yes.
It appears
that the Human Development faculty were not consulted until very recently.
Chancellor’s
council next week. I’ll speak up, said Kathy, if they want to go forward.
Bob: you
weren’t consulted? Nope. Haven’t heard a word about this. First official word
we had was last Thurs morning at 11:00.
This
started—we’ve been hearing about budget woes all year. People are retiring at
the center. Retirements are an opportunity to reorganize rather than firing
people.
Someone
asked a question about CDC. No decision has been made yet.
Kathy: the
VP for SS (Linda F) has been bringing this [data, case] around to various strategic
planning committees, saying that few students use the center as a lab school.
It’s very expensive for us. There are all these competitor schools around, so we
get few students. Those facts seem to point to the recommendation (not action).
No data was presented to us, beyond budget. We’re looking at a “huge shortfall
in budget” (for IVC) right now. Looking for budget solutions.
The idea
started with the VP (Linda F) and President (R). They’re supposed to send it
back through the committees. Going through IVC committee structure.
 |
| June |
Kathy:
they’re not proposing to close the CDC, not shut down the program. One
argument: closing the center will have only minimal effect on HD since so few
students use the CDC. That’s the key to the story. If it turns out that CDC is
core to HD, it’s a different argument.
Kathy: our
students aren’t using the CDC, they say. Not impacting the HD program.
Lots of
centers are closing around the state. Not so much OC. We brought in money for a
while.
Kathy:
faculty are working on it. So they’ll come back to us. Donna and Mary. We’ve
had a very vigorous conversation. We’ll see what we can do.
Moving to
item 18: faculty responsibilities/disability accommodations. The issue concerns the faculty role when
students request “note takers.”
DSPS person
(Judy) explained that our method is that note takers are “volunteers.” There’s
no money to hire people.
If there is
no note taker, it is the student’s responsibility to go to DSPS to deal with
it, work with the instructor through DSPS.
One senator
said: have you ever looked at some of the notes? (Implies they’re terrible.)
Kathy: this
came to us because of a problem, natch. Concern: interaction between students. We
can’t control that. Some are worried about liability. Some are concerned about
quality.
Kathy: our
instructors would feel much better if…. Not sure what she said, but faculty are
looking for clarity here about liability, how we might make this work, etc. Yes,
we can have them sign off on an understanding of voluntariness, etc.
Another
public comment: PRO-IVC.
Earth day. Held up a blue pig. People are supposed to insert $5 bills, I think,
into this pig. Laser the pig, according to Steve.
School
reports. “WRD,” I said, reporting for the School of Hum. [“We remain
disgruntled.”] And that was a much fuller report than others gave, excepting
The Arts. You know how their gums are always flappin’.
Other
reports:
Goes through
list of committees
“Nothin’,”
said virtually everyone.
No new board
policies. Blah blah blah.
Student
handbook. Anyone interested in participating?—contact Cessa and/or Tammy.
Bob: ASIVC
presentation at Budget yesterday. Finished draft later next week.
Students are
pursuing an “opt out” button for stickers. They automatically pay for student
government stickers (?), unless they opt
out. They expect this to produce maybe $250k.
Some faculty
grumbled that this way of collecting funds is dishonest. Bob said, simply, that
it’s not our call. Students.
Steve:
students have a legitimate concern about funding.
Pathways
project: workgroup is refining lists of majors/programs belonging in clusters.
They’ll bring info soon to this body. So we’re holding off on any action.
Anyone
interested in becoming SLO coordinator/chair? Let us know.
Residence
requirement. Kris: we still don’t have the workgroup together.
Moving
along: June do you have more about our possible involvement in pursuing
“sanctuary” for students threatened by the Trump Administration’s actions? No
materials ready yet.
One
country—Qatar?—has told its students not to try to come to the US.
Ilknur once
again advised cautiousness. I said, “On the other hand, we seek to be as
reckless as possible.” Humor, I guess.
Online
education handbook. Main
proponent isn’t here.
(There’s
been much discussion about a proposed set of training courses that online ed
instructors will be urged or required to take henceforth. The suggestion has
worried some faculty about proper faculty control over courses. De facto
evaluations? Etc.)
Ilknur: page
9. Hybrid modalities. Pedagogical readiness. I’ve been teaching (this) for 15
years. I did that training. (the 2nd part not the first). Now I’m
being told to retrain again for 4 weeks, since I didn’t do the first part. This
is time consuming! The committee should look into grandfathering, etc. Ilknur
got louder and louder until I was compelled to shift my chair to the east.
We’d better
be careful, cuz we’ll burn out the faculty. Produce a test to test out, she
demanded.
Somebody
said that they take an “opposite view.”
It’s dangerous to grandfather anyone into the pool, they said.
Jeannie: I
took the course. I was annoyed by it. Didn’t learn much. Very basic. Still
don’t know how to use Canvas, goshdarnit.
Kathy: no
one is promoting “grandfathering” as in automatic A O K.
Send any
ideas to Roopa or….
They need
the input.
Election.
Tabled for
now.
Institutional
set standards. Already
submitted.
Two kinds of
standards. A floor with some standards. Benchmarks below which we intend never
to fall.
“Canary in
the mine” kinds of standards.
The other
kinds of standards are “aspirational.”
 |
| Davit seemed unsympathetic |
Davit K introduces self. He’s
supposed to answer questions about the budget.
Bob: would
you like to discuss CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER?
Davit: on
the CDC. BSR (budget resolutions). We looked at all the departments,
interviewed all the managers. The college subsidized that program (CDC?). The
subsidy amount that used to be $230 – has gone up. It has started to go up. It
reached $400k and may go even higher. The budget situation has not improved:
looking at shortfall. CDC is a big amount that could address the
shortfall/deficit. We don’t have much time to present a balanced budget!
Question:
closing it or making it run better? Davit: We have authorization to plan the
closing (from board).
Mary: why
was the academic side of the school (et al.) not pulled in to use their
resources to attempt to look at “what we could do”? Lots of options, changes
possible. We were totally told for the first time Thurday of last week. We have
an academic program—likely to fold without a lab school. There’s constant
student use of that center. We’ve been given no official notification of any
type. We now have four days to come up with…. [didn’t catch this]
You need to
talk to VP of I (Chris McDonald) on anything about the academic side of things,
said Davit.
This issue
is not new, said Davit. When Prop 30 was on the ballet…. We listed these
things. This came up 3-4 years ago. It’s not a new idea or solution.
Kathy: CDC
is an integral part of an academic program. The members of that program should
have been called in much earlier than this. We’re getting very different info
today than we got from the VP of SS (Linda F)
Steve: a
facility that houses an academic program—not included at all in discussion or recommendation. Once again, we have the Aristocracy vs. the commoners. Completely
inappropriate…not tell the people…. Could ask: can you help us reduce cost?
Davit: I’m
not in the position to answer your question (Mary).
There’s a
sense that there was not enough conversation about this recommendation. Why
can’t you bring it up with the VPI?
Mary: what
realistic options do you suggest to keep the center from being closed?
Davit: I’m
trying to deal with the deficit. We’ll have to find the $500k from somewhere
else.
Jeannie: You
seem to want the CDC to be self-sufficient (paying for itself). None of the
other labs are self-sufficient. Why a different standard here?
Gotta look
at instructional benefit (he said, I think).
Kris: has
there been thought about disruption to students? Answer: yes.
Thought has
been given to that.
Diana: we
have a process for program discontinuation, and it isn’t “pull the rug out from
under the program.” I wish you had said,
If we’re having this discussion, we need to get the faculty involved. This is
program discontinuance by eliminating funding.
Kathy: we
were led to believe that few of our students use the lab school. OK, if true,
little impact. If that turns out to be true, then it is implicitly a programmatic
decision. You’re in effect deciding to end a program. This is called
railroading. Donna and Mary have come here to shed a light on the reality.
Steve: paraphrasing
the old Clinton election team: it’s the “process, people”
If we have a
deficit, and we need to address it, at least include the people impacted by it.
We haven’t done that. I only just found out.
Ilknur:
looks suspiciously like an easy move to deal with the deficit.
Kathy:
there’s the budget, but it’s been hard to talk about because (didn’t finish
sentence).
Bob: we
haven’t heard from VPI though we’ve heard from VPSS
No comments:
Post a Comment