from Humanities Senator Roy Bauer:
I alert you to two items on the agenda for today’s senate meeting: items I (Guided Pathways) and J (Vote of confidence in Prez Roquemore).
Item J is a motion to go forward with a vote of no confidence. Item I concerns a proposal, from the Guided Pathways crew, for senators to choose between two “possible permutations of IVC Guided Pathways Interest Areas”:
J. Vote of Confidence/No Confidence for the College President
Vote of Confidence/No Confidence for the College President
Shall the Representative Council move forward with the process of a vote of confidence/no confidence for the President of the College?
One concern is that many faculty at the college have managed to remain unfamiliar with the various issues that have arisen, especially since last summer, regarding the President and his actions/inactions. Hence, it is possible that a vote could reveal that more faculty support the President than do not.
I have spoken with Brittany about this, and I told her that, at least for now, I plan to vote for going forward. I have no doubt that a substantial proportion of full-time faculty do not support the President (Roquemore), and even if that proportion is small (say, 20%), the existence of that segment would be damning.
But I certainly understand the worry.
Let me know what you think.
I should mention that the Senate Cabinet has generated the following document, an attempt to identify “concerns” about President Roquemore:
To: Academic Senate Representative Council
From: Academic Senate Cabinet
RE: Cabinet’s Findings on Vote of Confidence Information
Date: April 4, 2019
In response to the motion passed by the Academic Senate Representative Council, the Academic Senate cabinet has gathered faculty concerns regarding President Roquemore’s performance of his duties as President of Irvine Valley College. The concerns expressed by faculty members, sorted according to the duties outlined in a recent SOCCCD job description for a College President*, are presented below.
A. Leadership
Job Description:
To serve as educational leader and Chief Executive Officer at one of two community colleges in a multi-college district reporting to the Chancellor; assure the delivery of educational and other services provided by assigned college; provide visionary leadership in the overall administration of the college; develop an administrative organization which shall be the established authority on campus; develop and implement the district and college’s strategic plan and implement Board of Trustee policies and district administrative procedures; and serve as the final authority at the college level.
To formulate and articulate a vision of the college’s future that addresses the evolving social, economic, and political forces that affect its mission and campus priorities, in which teaching, learning, student access and student success are central to the college mission.
Concerns
1. President Roquemore has not openly been involved in changing the DRAC model changing or in getting more money for our campus.
2. Most communications from the President are regarding negative information (death, national tragedies, acts of God, etc.), not about direction of the college, what we are working towards, etc.
3. In a time where faculty are inundated by outside-of-classroom requests, there is no quarterback to lead us, coordinate our efforts, or help us understand the importance of all the moving parts (IEPI Grant Funding, ADA Self Evaluation, Educational Master Plan meetings, Marketing & Outreach Strategy, etc.).
4. The President appeared to be uninvolved in the creation of IDEA and hasn’t involved himself in conversations regarding low-enrolled programs.
5. The administration has done little to support and promote CE programs, delegating outreach and promotional events to the faculty as unpaid volunteers. The exception is with one particular, “favorite” program.
6. The current administration simply lacks the will, understanding, and ability to effectively manage CE programs. Administration priorities are single-variable productivity, academic general education, and being "number one in transfers."
7. The President allowed spouse to remain on campus for decades which limited the effectiveness and undermined the authority of the dean and other faculty.
8. A college president is responsible for his/her vice presidents and it appears he has not been involved with them and, more specifically, in enrollment management.
9. Problems and successes of student equity and student success lie squarely on the President and administration.
10. When the Director of Student Life returned from administrative leave, no announcement was made to the campus at large.
11. The President openly bypassed his own VPI to get favorable intel from Saddleback VPI regarding curriculum, then reportedly attempted to intimidate a classified staff person about the situation.
B. Transparency & Engagement
Job Description:
To report to the Chancellor and execute all powers and duties in accordance to rules and regulations of the Board of Trustees, Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, and the laws of the State of California; serve as the institutional leader and implement board policies and administrative regulations as applicable to the position; serve under contract and establish annual goals, which are approved by the Chancellor; and advise the Chancellor on matters related to District planning, policies, operations, as they affect the diverse body of students and employees at the college.
To maintain effective working relationships with faculty, staff and students, as well as on a district-wide basis with the other college and district services; and advocate for the community college using a collaborative, collegial leadership style that also supports the district’s strategic plan and achievement of the districtwide goals and objectives.
Concerns: Faculty Engagement
1. At a time when the college is being forced to cut classes with high efficiency as the primary enrollment goal and when there is limited support at ATEP (no coffee for students and faculty placed in the tutoring center), there is a $4.9mil proposal being flown for 12 IDEA signs. $500,000 has already been spent on the design of these signs. Even though faculty don’t approve this spending, it should have been communicated.
2. Ask a new FT faculty whether he or she has seen the President since Flex week? Has he ever spoken with that faculty member after his or her hiring? The President does not show his care or concern for faculty.
3. Lack of communication and concern with faculty safety; specifically, regarding a threatening letter sent to the College.
4. During his own curriculum controversy, he did not ask to address faculty or attend an Academic Senate Representative Council meeting.
5. With the rollout of security cameras and keycards across campus, the President never visited the Academic Senate even though it was requested of him by Senate President.
6. The administration has become a punitive gatekeeper, rather than a supportive partner to our programs. Its failure to adequately plan and support our CE programs is wasting the talents and energy of our faculty and staff, disrupting and frustrating the academic careers and livelihoods of our students, and alienating the business community.
7. The Flex Week presentation on safety did not address the actual concerns of campus employees.
Concerns: Campus Engagement
1. The President is rarely visible on campus outside of required meetings.
2. There are huge deficits in communication and partnership, particularly regarding money, which affects enrollment management. One example is when IVC didn’t have enough money (millions short of budget), then we were miraculously not in debt. A couple years later (recently), there was consideration to give a loan to Saddleback, which was discussed behind closed doors and never mentioned to faculty.
3. There was little discussion/involvement surrounding the closing of the Child Development Center. Prior to the closing, personnel issues weren’t managed. The decision to close it was rushed and though a vote came through Senate, it was not clear how it would affect instructional programs. Details were buried and minimized, and a thorough research of the ramifications was not completed (3-year no use law).
4. Question: “If he was gone tomorrow, would you know?”
Concerns: Community/Business Engagement
1. The President has not been involved in raising money for the college through the foundation or other means.
2. The President has not been involved in overall marketing of college, #1 transfer rate was not his effort.
C. Shared Governance
Job Description:
To foster a culture of collaboration, mutual respect, innovation, and continuous improvement throughout the district; lead by example; actively participate in and support district-wide participatory governance components and activities and other collaborative processes; encourage professional excellence among the staff and promote an organizational culture of customer service, innovation, and quality services.
Concerns: Collaboration & Accountability
1. The President backed the recent SC “loan” with Davit without consulting shared governance. The loan proposal was only discussed with IVC administration and the district, and was not discussed in BDRPC, where faculty attend. There is a failure to see Senate as a partner on campus.
2. The President continually avoids budget conversations with shared governance groups (10+1). He involves himself in budget planning and concerns behind closed doors.
3. The President blamed Craig Justice for issues after he left his role as VPI.
4. There is a lack of involvement by the President with his senior leadership.
5. The President’s Cabinet meetings (VPs and Senate Presidents) have been cancelled several times and does not regularly meet any longer.
6. The President hasn’t broken down silos on campus( such as Student Services). This has not fostered collaboration across units.
Notes:
*The Job Description language has been taken from SOCCCD posting of President, Saddleback College (screening 5/8/17).
I. Guided Pathways Interest Areas
Guided Pathways Interest Areas
The purpose of this proposal is to ask you to choose between two possible permutations of IVC Guided Pathways Interest Areas as version 1.0. See an explanation of the options below.
With interest areas v 1.0 established, undecided students enter an Area that best fits their academic and career interests rather than choosing a major and then loosing precious time if they change their mind.
Some benefits of having Interest Areas:
1) Completion Teams for each Interest Areas –
a. Counselors (Liaisons for each Interest Areas)
b. Data Coaches
c. Deans/Administrators/Chairs
d. Discipline Faculty (DFMs – Discipline Faculty Mentors)
e. Financial Aid Experts
f. Academic Support Experts (Library, Writing, Tutoring)
g. Peer Mentors (2nd year students)
2) Marketing – interest areas, careers using websites, brochures, internships,
3) CCC Apply – if undecided, choose an interest area (available now to update)
This is an iterative process. With either choice, programs may work with the Guided Pathways Mapping and Interest Areas Design Team to if they believe a different Interest Area would be a better fit
|
Discussion/Action: Shall the Representative Council approve the Guided Pathways interest areas?
|
