DRAFT- Minutes

February 1, 2006 – 3:00 P.M.

Bldg. 25 Conference Room



Senate Representatives:  Lottie Bain, Richard Grotegut, Kay Harrison, Alan Kirshner, Bunny Klopping, Victoria Loukianoff, Susan Myers, Nancy Pauliukonis, Janel Tomblin-Brown, Marge Segraves, Heidi Story, Carolyn Strickler, Teresa Sutowski, and Barbara Tull.


Others Present:  Mark Lieu, Mike Bowman, Ron Travenick, Rob Smedfjeld, Chris Warden, Mikelyn Stacey


1. Announcements: CSUEB faculty visited us last year to discuss our programs and issues regarding transfer to CSUEB.  There will be another meeting this year, held at CSUEB on Friday, March 3.  The times will be around 10:00-2:00.  Mikelyn is looking for interested faculty who would like to participate in the discussion.  Faculty will be matched up with faculty in the same area and will have an opportunity to discuss things such as articulation, programs, or expectations of students.  If interested, contact Mikelyn.


2. Approval of Minutes December 7 and January 25


December 7 minutes approved with changes made via email.  January 25 minutes approved with one change from Barbara.


3. Student Services Reorganization – Ron Travenick (I)


The proposed Student Services reorganization plan would make the current Director of Enrollment and Curriculum Management/Articulation Officer the Dean of Enrollment Services and Institutional Research.  There was concern expressed by faculty that combining all of these functions under one person would be detrimental, as this seems to be too much for one person to handle.  Ron Travenick explained that Michael Bowman would maintain scheduling and articulation functions and add the research component to his job responsibilities.  He agreed that it can be difficult to manage wider and wider responsibilities, however, he feels this combination could work well.  He explained that Michael would be supporting a research function, which would mean assisting faculty to find the data that they need.  The direction research is moving is to put it into the hands of the faculty.  Currently, many faculty are doing their own surveys.   The Senate explained that concern expressed is not about Michael’s capability, rather, it is a concern that we are eliminating positions and combining too many responsibilities under one individual.  As a result, some of these functions might not be performed at the same level.  Michael made clear that he feels capable and confident that he can do the job as defined under the reorganization.  He explained that he knows how to do research and that he enjoys doing it.  He can share a lot of information about how to use Datatel so that faculty can retrieve the data they want.  Michael and Ron both share the concern about the diminishing number of Student Services administrators, but they both feel that the reorganization could work.   They both agreed that reducing administration was the best way to avoid layoffs for faculty and/or staff.


Faculty Senate members again expressed a concern that the college is putting so many job responsibilities under one person.  The question was asked to what extent are we having input before these recommendations are made?  The faculty would like to be part of the decision-making process. 


Motion: Faculty Senate expresses concern that the practice of consolidating additional tasks with current job descriptions has become a trend that could hinder the delivery of services to students and staff.  Further, the Senate requests that they be consulted during the development of plans for reorganization (Tomblin-Brown). Second (Myers).  All in favor.  Motion passed.


4. Impact of the Compressed Calendar on student registration, deadlines, and course wait lists – Ron Travenick (I)


Ron provided a visual aid of an “Add Period” calendar to show us the three dates that are important to the first 14 days of each term –the start date for the term, the deadline for refund, and the Census date, which is the deadline for students to add classes.  During our last discussion, faculty expressed a desire to be able to drop students who no-show from both the roster and from the waitlist.  Ron proposed adding a “Faculty Drop” column to WebAdvisor that will allow us to do this.  We will have codes for “No Show” (NS), “Withdraw” (W) and “Faculty Signature” (FS).  “Faculty Signature” requires Faculty Signature for students to add the class.


A question was asked about how we can make the waitlist process more clear for students.  Students who place themselves on the waitlist should go to the class.  If they do not attend class, another student who is behind them on the waitlist and who attends the class could be added into the class before them.  Students may not be aware of this.  We should try to make this clear in WebAdvisor.


Barbara suggested that we take this information back to our constituents for discussion.  We should ask what we want to be able to do with the Wait List.  We have the capability for "Open Registration”, which would allow faculty to control who adds into the class regardless of the position on the waitlist.  Faculty should decide how they want to use this capability.



5. Final Exams and Commencement under the compressed calendar – Tull (I)


This continues the discussion began at the last meeting.  Under the compressed calendar, the final exam period will be Monday-Friday instead of the current Friday-Thursday schedule.  If we move commencement to Saturday morning, it will fall in Memorial Day weekend.  Several suggestions were made, including moving it to the Saturday prior to finals, having it Friday evening, and keeping it Thursday night.  Since this is not a decision we have to make today, the suggestion was made to do a survey and see what most people would prefer. 


Motion:  Recommend that the faculty inform the students and faculty that we prefer a Thursday night graduation due to the fact of the Memorial Day weekend and ask for student and faculty input as well (Kirshner). Second (Bain).  Six in favor.  Four opposed. One abstention.  Motion passed.


A comment was made that it might be too early for the Senate to take a position, since the preference of students and faculty has not yet been determined.  The clarification was made that the Senate makes this motion as a starting point, and would seek input from students and faculty as described in the motion.


6. Policy Change:  “D” grades and graduation requirements - Tull (A)


GE Committee recommended to the Curriculum Committee in October 2005 that GE Plan A Area 4A, B, and C should require a “C” or better to qualify for the AA Degree.  The Curriculum Committee approved the above mentioned recommendation in December 2005.  Barbara explained that the GE Committee put a lot of work into this recommendation.  The Senate has already heard presentations on this topic, including the presentation made by students that supported this recommendation.


Additionally, GE recommends that Faculty Senate and Curriculum Committee clarify the definition of a “D” grade in the Ohlone College catalog. 


Motion: to approve above GE subcommittee recommendation (Klopping). Second (Segraves).  All in favor.  Motion passed.


7. Senate Planning and Goal Setting


Barbara asked Senators if there were any issues that they would like to discuss this semester.  Concern was expressed about the effects of the construction.  This issue was brought up during Fixed Flex at the President’s Report.  For instance, people in Building 7 are currently being affected by the construction. How do we get information to specific people who are going to be affected? 


Another issue is policies on faculty hiring, specifically, what are the responsibilities of a committee chair?  How are people appointed to a hiring committee?  When does a group become a committee?


Another issue was reassigned time.  How is it determined what reassigned time is given to faculty?


A question was raised related to shared governance – what is the purpose of the Task Forces?  Barbara announced that she and Dennis have been talking about getting members of College Council together with the Senate to discuss the roles of each body.  


Another issue is faculty participation.  A number of people are on many committees, whereas some faculty are doing little by comparison.  Nurturing new leadership among faculty is something that the Senate should consider.  We also need to think about the health of the Senate – currently, all of the Senate officer positions are not filled.  We also need to determine a President-elect, as Barbara’s term is over in June.  Also, if we have open seats on the Senate, should this position become an at-large position?  A suggestion was made to have the large Senate meeting during Flex Day be a working meeting.


Meeting adjourned 4:45 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