DRAFT - Minutes
December 7, 2005 - 3:00 PM
Bldg 25 Conference Room
Senate Representatives: Lottie Bain, Richard Grotegut, Kay Harrison, Alan Kirshner, Bunny Klopping, Victoria Loukianoff, Susan Myers, Nancy Pauliukonis, Tim Roberts, Janel Tomblin-Brown, Marge Segraves, Heidi Story, Carolyn Strickler, Teresa Sutowski, and Barbara Tull.
Others present: Jim Wright, Michael Bowman, Chris Warden, Paula Bray, Jim Hatlo, Rob Smedfjeld, Ron Travenick, Diane Berkland, Michael De Unamuno, Bob Bradshaw, Cheryl Lambert, Deb Parziale.
1. Announcements - none
Barbara had one addition to the President’s Update that she will email to Susan. Minutes approved with addition from Barbara.
Barbara received an email from Marilena Tamburello. The bid from WebCT Vista has not yet arrived. Consequently, there has been an extension through January for the decision we have to make regarding the proposed e-learning options. This item will be on the agenda of the first Senate meeting in January.
Barbara received information on one Hayward Award candidate, but not the other candidate. We will postpone voting on this until all information is available.
Kay sent out an attachment with committee assignments for the entire campus. Some faculty put down interview committees, although these don’t actually count as committee work. There are only about 10 faculty not currently serving on a committee. Jim Wright asked that the Senate address this issue. Barbara has already followed up with some faculty on the list to ask what plans they have for committee work. Alan mentioned that in the past, committee work was two years on, one year off. This was established practice set by Faculty Senate. The point was brought up that committee work is actually a contract issue. Alan brought up that this is also an administrative issue. The Senate decided that this deserves more discussion and should put this item on the agenda of the January meeting.
Brenda Anholtz’s Speech 102 class presented findings from a recent survey they conducted of 100 registered students. The vast majority of students surveyed are between 18-24 years of age. Half of those surveyed had a 3.0 or higher gpa. Based on their findings, the students made the following recommendations:
§ “D” grades should remain on the grade scale.
§ “D” grades should not count for your major.
§ “D” grades should count for elective courses.
§ Catalog should warn students that a “D” grade in many transferable courses will not count.
§ Redefine a “D” grade at Ohlone as failing/unsatisfactory/see dept. for minimum requirements.
There was discussion about the last recommendation to define the “D” grade as failing/unsatisfactory. The students wanted to give stronger language to the definition of a “D” grade to emphasize that fact that “D” grades will not transfer. The students may not want us to define “D” as “failing/unsatisfactory”, perhaps we could define it as “unsatisfactory” or “barely passing”. What we currently use at Ohlone are the Title V guidelines. The students also like the inclusion of “see dept. for minimum requirements”. A Senator suggested that we include this statement only for departments that offer degrees. The students feel that since the information on the grading policy is so crucial it should be more visible in the catalog and perhaps also be included in the schedule.
Chris Warden announced that Brenda’s students presented the same information at the most recent Curriculum Committee meeting. The bottom line is that the students want better verbiage in the catalog. This was an action item on the Committee's agenda. The committee voted to require a “C” grade or higher in Plan A General Education Areas IVA, IVB & IVC (English, Math, and Analytical Thinking). A suggestion was made that the departments themselves should vote on this first, then this should come to the Senate.
Motion: The Curriculum Committee’s recommendations be sent to the involved departments for a vote and then come back to the Senate for final approval with a deadline of January 25 (M) Kirshner (S) Loukianoff. 5 yes, 8 nay. Motion does not carry.
The question was raised that if the department does not agree with the Curriculum Committees recommendations, who would rule, the Senate or the department? This could create a dilemma if the department votes one way and the Senate votes another. The discussion was that the departments be involved in the decision making, but the final decisions should be made by the Senate. The point was also raised that the Senate is a representative body, and should therefore represent the wishes of the departments in the voting process. For that reason, it was suggested that the departments should not vote on this issue, rather, they should be consulted and given an opportunity to provide feedback.
Motion: The Senate president will send an announcement to faculty that we will vote on the recommendations of the Curriculum Committee at the January 25 Senate meeting (M) Segraves (S) Harrison. Approved unanimously.
Handout on Building 7 Planning. Building 7 needs to be removed in order to create space for new construction on campus. Paula Bray presented a plan to relocate the classrooms from Building 7 and to create more classroom space in the long term. This plan was developed over a couple of months through shared governance. Contributors to the plan include Michael Bowman, Kimberly Robbie, Jim Wright, Ron Travenick and his staff, deans, and faculty. This plan will benefit the college, whether or not we demolish Building 7. We want to have the building demolished by June, 2006. Building 7 has four general lecture rooms and two Health Science classrooms. These classrooms will be relocated to space that will be renovated in Building 1 (fourth floor), Building 6 (first floor), Hyman Hall (room 120), Room 4104A, and Room B18. More information on the work timeline and resources needed are available in the handout given to Senators.
There was a question about the storage rooms and offices in Building 7. These aren’t mentioned in the plan. Paula confirmed that the storage rooms in Building 7 are being used by Building and Grounds. They will lose these rooms. The offices will need to be relocated. There are only 3 offices in the building. Office space will be tight until the Newark campus opens, when about 20 faculty will be relocating.
In addition, next week Buildings and Grounds will begin to install access ramps in front of Buildings 4 and 6. These areas will be fenced off. The new ramps will lead to the second level of the first floor. Work producing extreme noise should be completed or discontinued by 7:00 AM each day so as not to disturb classes during finals.
7. 16-week calendar and the schedule for Fall – Travenick (I)
According to the Chancellor’s Office, our condensed calendar will be approved officially next Wednesday. Right now, we are the only college that is being approved for the condensed calendar. The Senate commended Ron Travenick, Michael Bowman, and Kimberly Robbie for their efforts in getting the calendar approved. February 10 is the deadline for making adjustments to the schedule, such as classroom usage. Deb asked if there is any time to have a “College Hour”. Michael Bowman mentioned that we are pretty tight for the next two years and this would be difficult. However, after construction is completed we could consider different scheduling options, such as having a block schedule with Fridays free. Kay asked when we are going to start leasing space to Alliant. The answer is that we will start in the spring. They will only be using one classroom at night. The classes will probably be scheduled at times that won’t conflict with Ohlone classes, but it depends on how their program unfolds with student participation.
8. Update on Title III – Deb Parziale and Rob Smedfjeld
Deb and Rob provided a handout on the 7 main goals for Title III that correlate with the 7 goals in the College’s Strategic Plan. Among other things, these goals focus on developing active and collaborative learning methods and technology-assisted learning, particularly for basic skills and ESL students. By implementing these goals we hope to have more students enrolled full-time. Rob mentioned that we will probably be asked to do some surveys. There was a question about how some of the numbers were determined in the Title III goals. Dr. Treadway actually synthesized information from several sources in writing this grant. Another Senator asked how we are going to define some of these terms. Deb and Rob are actually looking for feedback in defining terms such as “active and collaborative learning”. Deb and Rob would really like to work with the Senate in defining what we would like to accomplish with Title III, as well as in the implementation of its goals and objectives. Deb will be reporting regularly to Senate on Title III progress.
9. President’s Update
Barbara reported good progress at last Board meeting. They did a self-evaluation. The extended Board (including Barbara and Dennis Keller) took home the survey, filled it out and brought it back to the Board. This survey included questions about the Board's performance. The Board will be voting next week on their new president, as well as on plans for the new Student Services Center. There is even talk by some Board members to revisit again whether or not we will demolish Building 7. Barbara urged the Senate again to rally faculty to attend the Board meetings. It carries a lot more weight for faculty to be present at these meetings than having Barbara and Dennis repeating themselves every week. The Board does not see itself as part of shared governance, rather, it sees itself as being above shared governance. Another problem is that the Board is not held accountable for the money they spend by postponing decisions. For instance, just receiving RFPs from developers cost us around 167-200K, which . comes out of our bond money*. Dennis has asked the College Council to attend the next Board meeting. He and Barbara are asking the Senate to recruit faculty to attend future meetings. Barbara asked Senators again to please come to the meetings. Rob commented that it sounds as if the Board is not recognizing Barbara’s role as a representative of the entire faculty. He suggested that we draft some proclamation from the Senate that Barbara is indeed the representative of the faculty and not just speaking for herself at these meetings. *Note - The cost of the RFP actually comes out of the City of Fremont Redevelopment (pass through) Funds.
Motion: The Senate President is the voice of the entire faculty and should be acknowledged as such in a petition to be signed by the entire faculty and presented to the Board (M) Harrison (S) Kirshner. Motion approved unanimously.
Rob suggested that we just collect signatures of faculty on a petition. It was also suggested that we allow faculty to submit email in lieu of signatures in order to get more signatures. Another Senator asked if the Senate can endorse a Board president. Nick Nardolillo and Bob Brunton are both competing for Board president. It was suggested that we go to next Wednesday's Board meeting and ask direct questions to the running candidates.
Meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
Senators for 2005 - 2006
Building 1 & 5 Bunny Klopping
Building 2 & Hyman Hall Kay Harrison - Committees Chair
Building 4 & Smith Center Teresa Sutowski
Building 6 & 7 Marge Segraves
Building 8 Carolyn Strickler Rep to CCLC
Building 9 & NOC vacant
Counseling and LR&IT Susan Myers Secretary
Deaf Studies & Special Services Nancy Pauliukonis
Exercise Science & Wellness Lottie Bain Treasurer
Fine Arts, Business, & Broadcasting Janel Tomblin-Brown/Tim Roberts
Health Sciences Heidi Story
Lang. Arts & Soc. Sci. (English & ESL) Barbara Tull President
Lang. Arts & Soc. Sci. (other depts.) Alan Kirshner
Math, Sci., & Tech. (ASTR, BIOL, BIOT,
CAOT, CHEM, CS, & PHYS) Richard Grotegut
Math, Sci., & Tech. (other depts.) Victoria Loukianoff