Thursday, February 15, 2018

February 15 meeting of IVC Academic Senate

This is pretty rough, unedited. Sorry about that. Been busy. --RB 
Been pretty peevish, too.
 
Feb 15 meeting of IVC Academic Senate
 
I asked about the Kiana action (Kiana T of chemistry has been reassigned to the Chemistry Department down at Saddleback, owing to worries of Nepotism; she is Glenn Roquemore’s wife). June said a little about it, but­­­ didn’t seem to have intimate knowledge, though she said she was involved at some level. She said that junior faculty complained—apparently, about the chair of their department, Kiana T. Evidently, these complaints led to some action but the new HR person. June also mentioned that the action concerned the district’s “nepotism” policy and the notion of conflict of interest.  (Evidently, the district is acting or acted to review that nepotism policy.) Some mention of union involvement. Evidently, Kiana “volunteered” to move down to SC
 
We discussed the need for a full-time nurse or other professional to help with students with mental health problems. As we’ve heard previously, the person we have now is overwhelmed with student problems now.
 
VPI MacDonald: Office of Instruction is undergoing reorganization.
SEE MACDONALD’S ORGANIZATION CHART: HERE -
 
Too many managers at ATEP. Will go from 4 to 1.
1 dean position at ATEP. A 2nd manager at ATEP will be categorically funded.
Upshot: $750K a year. Blah, blah, blah
 
Rebecca: The workgroup for Guided Pathways
A plea for more faculty to serve on this committee! There’s just three of us, hardly a good representative body. It’s really important that you have a voice, especially if you’re part of a small department. 
Please join our workgroup
 
June: want to remind everyone: as far as pathways goes: current configuration can change. IF we feel things aren’t working, we can change things. Senate prez and Office of I—leaders. We should feel free to PIVOT if we feel that things aren’t working. Dean Fahimi is the designee for guided pathways. 
 
The President vacations with a probie. Huh?
First summit under our belt. Let’s stop and breath. Money coming, but we need to have open conversation about it. 
We’ve got a deadline March 5, said Tracy. Are we hitting our milestone targets? The state requires a work plan. Do we have one? That’s the focus right now. 
June: what I see with the reorg: we’re having a lot of CTE issues. Career Technical Ed. 
School of business is entirely CTE. 
It’s more programs than you think.
We’re efficient, SC is not (in this instruction)
June wants to talk about this more broadly. 
 
Dan D: Ac Affairs is working to rethink our Distinguished lecture series. Also IVC to IVC
We talked to student government about potential funding.
We’ve been working with Office of I to reorganize flex week. President’s program will be on Thurs morning in the fall. We’re trying to …
 
Courses/curriculum:
Chris M: they’re proposing a new funding formula to increase “accountability.”
Proposal: 50% based on FTES.
THE REST: need. 
Will put a lot of strain of financial aid. 
Blah blah blah.
Diane: CTE faculty are aware: there’s money, based on students completing awards. (?) But we’re all going to have to be concerned about this. Funding based on students…
 
They kept using the word “award” in a manner I didn’t understand. Good grief.
 
Board policies:
 
Employee travel: some changes, from state, that seem onerous, etc. Making it up to date. 
Credit by exam: please read it. Here it is:
#6 is problematic. Who is the instructor. Min quals. 
 
Richard Kudlick:
Richard Kudlick will discuss his duties and responsibilities as SOCCCD Internal Auditor. 
Our new auditor spoke, explaining his role
Lots of confusion about his role.  
I have to focus my attention to areas of need, he said
My background: public accounting, corporate world. Went to Coast CCD. Director of audit for many years. Interim director for several years. 
Has a broad understanding of what happens at the community college. “Keep us out of the newspapers,” that’s my job. Keeping up with new laws, regulations. 
We’ve been behind in some areas. Example: red flag rules, identity theft. 
I’m here to help. Critical: get information to me. 
Work with your administration, deans. 
Hopeful, faculty will not be involved, but that may happen.
Here to make sure processes are in place, are followed, etc. Working with key persons on campus—doing things and not slowing things up on campus. Don’t want bottlenecks. 
June: Perhaps if we had a guy like you around, we would have caught the nepotism issue long ago. 
Right now my biggest issues, he said: financial aid. Student refund policy or lack thereof. When a student drops, we should automatically return money to credit card. We don’t. That won’t do.
Implementing Workday has been a headache, want to take a break from that struggle
Focusing on the students. In this case, a fiscal component. We need to get this money back to students asap. I’ve watched employee travel very closely in past. Some looseness here compared to other districts. 
NEXT: Stacy Lavino will give a brief update on the services provided by the Health Center. 
Mental health therapist, Stacy Lavino. At health and wellness center. We desperately need full time position.
So, what is a crisis? 
SUICIDAL students. ETc. 
Student CARE referral. See ivc website
Dan: how adequately staffed are we?
It’s only me. A 1-14k ratio. Good Lord. 
 
In regards to the MOU realigning college and district IT roles and responsibilities and the possible effect on IVC’s academic IT needs. 
Item L: 
IT support at the district and college levels 
In regards to the MOU realigning college and district IT roles and responsibilities and the possible effect on IVC’s academic IT needs. 
No faculty were consulted before this memo was “signed”?
Saddleback and I [June] both complained about that.
“It’s so technical, nobody would have understood.”
No shared governance at all.
Real deficiencies in staffing funding college IT.
 
Want to re-agendize this for March 1:
M. Hiring of FT Categorical Counselors 
Hiring of full-time counselors using Student Success and Support Program (SSSP) categorical funds 
The School of Guidance and Counseling is requesting the approval to hire additional full-time counselors using Student Success and Support Program (SSSP) funds. The counselors hired will include 2 generalist counselors and 1 counselor dedicated to Foster Youth/EOPS. The SSSP funds are categorical and as such would not affect the IVC general budget 
Shall the Representative Council approve the Hiring of 3 full-time categorical counselors? 
 
Robert M: blah blah blah
“Based off of” he said. “based off of the formula” – OK, that tears it. That’s not English, is it? My students write and speak that way: That’s “based off of” such and such.
I drives me mad. WHAT ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT? How can something be based OFF of something else?
I think Counselors should be kicked out of the faculty club; put ‘em a step below janitors. Or let’s get rid of them entirely. Yeah.
Looking to hire from funds. Categorical funding. 
Melanie: what if cat funding disappears? Robert: folded into general. 
We voted, passed.
Next meeting first of March.

Thursday, February 1, 2018

SENATE MEETING – Feb. 1, 2018

Small horses. Who knew?

I’ll mention the controversial item first:

Item I: Curriculum Committee recommends allowing IVC to change the current residency requirements.

Shall the Representative Council approve the Curriculum Committees recommendation to allow IVC to change the residency requirements? Here’s the relevant verbiage:

Currently:
Certificate of Proficiency Requirements (certificates that are less than 18 units) 
Catalog page 26: 
To earn the certificate of proficiency students must 
1.     Complete all of the courses in the certificate program with grade of “A,” “B,” “C,” or 
“P.” 
2.     Complete a minimum of 12 units in the certificate program at Irvine Valley College. If 
the total requirement for the certificate of proficiency is less than 12 units, students must complete all of the courses at Irvine Valley College. See counselor for assistance. 
Replace #2 with the following: 
Complete a minimum of 50% of the units in the certificate program at Irvine Valley College. See counselor for assistance. 
Certificate of Achievement (certificates with 18 units or more) 
Catalog page 26: 
To earn the certificate of achievement students must 
1.     Complete all of the courses in the certificate program with grade of “A,” “B,” “C,” or “P.” 
2.     Complete a minimum of 12 units in the certificate program at Irvine Valley College. 
Replace #2 above with the following: 
Complete a minimum of 50% of the units in the certificate program at Irvine Valley College. See counselor for assistance. 

WE WANT to loosen it up the requirements. From A&R’s perspective, from counseling’s perspective, and accounting and biotech.
   Ben G: speaking for A & R. We started to see students who had courses from other schools. Those student were hurt by our residency requirements. Not approved for certificate. A mixed message. This is on the increase. Big concern of consistency. We want a clear, consistent standard. We get a lot of students with courses from elsewhere. 
   How many students are we talking about, Ben? Was a handful. But seeing an increase: 10 or 15. This number could get bigger. 
   What do other colleges do? Varies tremendously. All over the place. No one was able to express the “rationale” for the existing residency requirement.   
   Accounting guy said we now have certificates that are highly prized because of greater rigor of IVC accounting courses. We don’t want to lose that. So he opposed this change of policy.
   Ilknur EW says: same situation in engineering. 
   Melanie: students take a writing course at SC English that doesn’t have the same rigor. But we accept these units. 
   Biotec guy: I couldn’t hear him. “Blah blah blah.”
   Pretty intense discussion. Lots of disagreement. 
   French at IVC is rigorous. At Saddleback, not so much. They’ve got online courses. We’re trying to maintain quality. 
   Is there the possibility of a test that students must pass at end for certificate? Diana: no, has to be in courses.  Diana: why not create an 8 week course that puts all requirements together? But no, somehow unacceptable. Trying to accommodate accounting‘s concerns and Diana’s concerns—which reflect state requirements. Residency requirements are hurting our programs. 
   Ilknur SEEMS TO say that if this passes, “they [Engineering] are pulling out,” whatever that means. It’s supposed to be ominous, I suppose. No one shudders.
   19 to 7, approved. The change has been made. It is hoped that the aforementioned concerns can be addressed.
   Jeff: expects affected programs will come back with solutions.

Back to REPORT:
Prez June M. not present today
·          Counseling announced “stressbusters workshop,” etc. No doubt puppies are involved.
·          Foundation Director announced Foundation Awards Dinner, March 10
 Honoring “an incredible group of people” this year. Please remind your students to apply for scholarships. Deadline Feb. 10.
Executive report, etc.:
   Jeff (VP, replacing June today): discussions of the budget are “difficult to follow.” Partnership with Edwards Scientific Intrumentation—rumor of large partnership at ATEP. Also, something vague about some kind of So Cal astronaut training center. Possible, not likely, but if this happens, they’ll construct some dome-like structure. 
   Diana: WHAT’S THE BUDGET LOOK LIKE?
   Jeff: not known. Capping our growth. Puts us in a terrible financial bind. It would be great to avoid this. Chris M reported to us: we hit the target of efficiency (515?). He will go on that basis to challenge district allocation formula. Chris is trying to break the old model. 
   He’ll be bringing a reorg chart next meeting. It should save us $755K, he says. 
   Dan D (of Academic Affairs): we have 75k allocated per year, faculty development. So we rolled over from last year-30K. Let your schools know this. I appreciate their speed and efficiency, but it is too early to request funds now.
   Jeff added: might want to share this info with adjuncts, who often aren’t aware of availability of these funds.
   Diana (of Curriculum): big news. Soon there’ll be a big change in Title 5. Certificate of Achievement will not need 18 units, but only 16. We’ll be asking you to make changes accordingly. So that’s in the works.
   Consent items includes seating of 1 new senator: Melanie H. Welcome back.
Board polices and ARs

·       Service Animals 

Some DSPS issue. Need to wait to approve. We’ve been out of ADA compliance for a long time. Something about specifying that small horses can be service animals. Why small horses? Dunno.
Next:

BP 4009 / 3207 Drivers for District-Sponsored Activities 
AR 3207 District Driver and Vehicle Use Policy 
SOCCCD Driver forms 
   A senator said that new language was added that is very unclear.
   Dan referred to “micromanaging and unenforceable” language.
   Jeff: this is very poorly written, untenable. We aren’t voting on this yet, but we’ll convey these negative sentiments. A senator said: they sent this thing around as though it had gone through senate. But no. A “complete mistake,” says Stefanie. If you have input, get it to June and Maria by tomorrow morning.
   “Tomorrow morning?” I asked.
   “Yep.”
   Melanie: have we heard from Saddleback? –Not clear.
   Can still use existing form until change is made, if any
Item J: Academic Search Committee 

·  Astronomy 
·  Mathematics 
·  Counseling (Generalist) 
Approved
Item K. BP/AR 4090 Evaluation of Administrators and Classified Management Personnel 

BP/AR 4090 is being revised at the district. 
Input is needed on the revision of BP/AR 4090, which covers how both administrators and classified management are evaluated. 
Jeff: faculty and staff contributing to evaluation. That’s the proposal. 
Favorable comments toward this proposal.
   Dan: big grammatical problems in this draft. Someone who writes in English should write this, he (of Jeff?) said, dryly.
   Right now, the feeling of the senate is yes we want access (to evaluation of these people).
   See here & here for relevant attachments.
L. Tenure Review Committee Approval Process 

As a 10+1 item, the senate will beginning to enforce the Title 5 requirement for all tenure review committee to be approved by the Academic Senate.