Academic Senate Meeting
November 4, 2004
Voting Members
Present: (Senators) Donna Ayers, Terri English, Maria Fenyes,
Pat Flood,
Leslie Foster, Clive Gordon, Paul Kubicki, Eloise Cantrell, Stan Levine,
Vickie Oddino, Gary Prostak, Janice Silver
(Exec. Members) Angela Echeverri, Louise
Barbato, Gwen Walker, Margie Long, Leslie Milke, Michael Climo, Dale Newman
Faculty
Present:
Deborah Paulson, Lorraine Manoogian, Said Pazirandeh, David
Jordan,
Sonia Soto-Bair, Tricia Johnson, Cindy Cooper, Phoebe
Rivera, Ralph LaRosa, John Klitzner,
Lilamani De Silva, Myriam
Mekelburg, Mark Pursley, Jeanne Cassara, Sandy Thomsen,
Lee Risemberg, Suzanne Ritcheson, Quy Hoang, Ruthie Grant, Mehri
Hagan, Joanne Kalter-Flink, Joyce Woodmansee, Bonnie Sherman, Sandi Lampert,
Cecilia Chu-Ru Chan, June Wada
Guests Present: Elizabeth Saldivar, Student
Trustee; Martha Soto, Dean of Academic Affairs; Bill Farmer, Vice President of
Academic Affairs
Voting Members
Absent:
Rick Scuderi, Charles Dirks, John Orozco, and Roxanne Dalrymple
I.
President
Echeverri called the meeting to order at 1:41 p.m.
II.
Approval of Minutes (MSC
PROSTAK/KUBICKI) TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF
OCTOBER 7, 2004
III. Officer’s Reports
A. President, Angela Echeverri, handed out the following written report:
*************************************************************
Follow-up on
Prerequisites at Los Angeles Mission College
A
spreadsheet containing LAMC courses with prerequisites and/or corequisites was
e-mailed to all full-time faculty last month. Hard copies are available for
those who need them. Please review all courses in your disciplines carefully
for inaccuracies. Notify Academic Affairs and the Curriculum Committee
immediately of any errors or changes that need to be made.
Prerequisites fall into three categories:
· Prerequisites put in before Fall of 1994: These prerequisites have not been validated. They
should not be enforced nor published in the schedule and catalog. If they are important for
articulation and/or student success they must be validated and submitted to the Curriculum
Committee ASAP.
· Prerequisites put in after Fall of 1994 but not reviewed since Fall of 1998: These
prerequisites have been validated, but have not been reviewed within the last six years.
Faculty must indicate that these prerequisites are important for articulation and/or student
success in order for them to be published in the Spring 2005 schedule. In order to remain
in the schedule after Spring 2005, they must be updated by April of 2005. If faculty indicate
that the prerequisites are not necessary, they will be removed from schedule and catalog.
· Prerequisites put in after Fall of 1998: These prerequisites have been validated and are current.
They will be published in the Spring 2005 schedule and the catalog. All current prerequisites will
be enforced.
Advanced Course Status: All courses with previous advanced status will remain as such for the
Spring 2005 semester. In order to maintain advanced course status for Fall 2005,
all prerequisites that have not been reviewed in the last six years must be updated by
April 2005.
Challenge Procedure: The Curriculum Committee has developed and approved a formal challenge procedure for prerequisites and corequisites to be published in the catalog and schedule of classes.
Consultation with the President
On Tuesday November 2nd, the AFT Chapter President Maria Fenyes and I met with Dr. Barrera, Bill Farmer, and Martha Soto. Items discussed included the following:
1. The need for a
more effective mechanism to link planning and budget at LAMC:
· Lack of faculty input in budget development
· The impact of fiscal cuts made by the administration on academic programs and enrollment:
o Insufficient supply accounts for academic departments due to 75% reductions compared to last year.
o LRC hours of operation and failure to meet noncredit enrollment targets
· The effectiveness of our shared governance process:
o Assessment & Planning and Resource Analysis Committees
o Budget Task Force: Put together for this year only (12 members, 2 full time faculty).
2. The future of the
PACE program:
· Retention, success, and enrollment of PACE students
· Consultation with faculty and October resolution in support of PACE
3. The fiscal
deficit projected for the college in 2004-05:
· LAMC is facing the largest projected deficit in the district ($1.5-$1.9 Million)
· District estimates we will need to spend about $1.2 Million in additional course offerings in Winter/Spring/Summer I to meet our growth targets for 2004-05.
· Budget task force: Administration is seeking ways to facilitate voluntary transfers, retirements, and workload reductions of classified staff to reduce projected deficit
4. Enrollment management: Academic affairs decision to allocate additional 45 instructional hours/department for Winter/Spring 2005
· Is this the best way to distribute offerings and meet our enrollment targets?
o Increasing basic skills courses in Math, English, and Developmental Communications would bring additional revenue to the college
o Academic departments different greatly in size and needs.
o What courses do students need to graduate and meet their goals?
· Council of Instruction could act as an enrollment management team.
· Plan to meet noncredit FTES target is not clear.
5. The effect of
possible changes in graduation requirements:
· Need for increased student support services (tutoring, computer labs, etc.)
· Number of graduating students
· Effect on vocational programs
Maria and I stressed the need for more consultation with faculty on all of these issues. PACE will remain as such in the Winter and Spring 2005. The President agreed to consultation with the Senate before any changes are implemented.
Academic Senate of California
Community Colleges (ASCCC)
The Fall 2004 ASCCC Plenary Session took place in Newport Beach from October 28-30th. The most important developments centered around several resolutions that seek to increase the minimum Title 5 graduation requirements for Math and English (see attachment). The ASCCC published a paper on the Math and English requirements on 10/4/04, which I e-mailed to all full-time faculty. At the meeting, I pointed out that the paper has several inaccuracies. It incorrectly lists LAMC as having higher Math and English graduation requirements, and West as having higher Math requirements. Several colleges with higher requirements were omitted (e.g.: Antelope Valley and Santa Monica). The paper also lacks information on when the higher requirements went into effect, so there is no baseline information to assess the effect on degrees awarded by these colleges.
Since our local Senate did not have a chance to discuss the issue or review the paper before our October meeting, I could not support making any resolutions to make changes to the current Title 5 minimum requirements. I argued in favor of a resolution to postpone a vote on changing the graduation requirements until the Spring of 2005. The resolution to postpone the vote was approved by a very narrow margin. In the LACCD, three colleges support increasing the requirements (West, East, and Pierce), the remaining colleges do not. However, based on the discussions at the session, it appears very likely that the graduation requirements will increase.
District Budget Committee
LAMC did not meet its noncredit enrollment targets last year (2003-04). This resulted in a reduction in our 2004-2005 total estimated allocation, which will be $20,838,000 (see handout). Additionally, Fall 2004 credit enrollments are down about 5% when compared to last year. The district estimates that we will need to spend an additional $1.2 Million to overcome the declines experienced in the fall and to be able to reach our growth targets for 2004-2005. We also will have increased expenditures due to salary and health increases. As a result LAMC is projected to have a deficit that will range between $1.4 and $1.9 Million for this fiscal year.
Instructional Support Funds:
Block Grant Funds: $128,444 was allocated to LAMC based on our % of FTES
Scheduled Maintenance: $126,282 was
allocated to LAMC. The district strongly encourages the colleges to use these
funds for scheduled maintenance projects, which require a 50% match by the
college. If this is not possible, the colleges may use these funds for
instructional equipment.
Academic Rank
Academic Rank Committee of the Senate is receiving applications for rank. Please submit your applications to Margie Long.
Advanced Course Status:
The Office of Academic Affairs has accepted the advanced course policy approved by the Senate in October of 2004. All courses with 2 validated and current college level prerequisites qualify for advanced course status. These courses have lower enrollment requirements in order not to be cancelled (8 versus 15 students). Please obtain application form from Louise Barbato.
Grants
LAMC recently obtained two grants from the Department of Education:
Title 5 Grant for Hispanic Serving Institutions: Approximately $2.5 Million over 5 years
TRAILS Grant for Biotechnology: Approximately $350,000 over 3 years. Provides support to develop
a transfer level Biotechnology course at LAMC (Biology 40). Funding includes paid several summer
internships for LAMC students at CSUN and MannKind Corporation.
Decentralization of Faculty
Hiring:
Yesterday LAMC hosted a workshop to review the major changes that will take place in the decentralization of faculty hiring. Louise Barbato will discuss workshop in her report.
Faculty Input in Prop A and AA Construction
The DAS President Leon Marzillier
has requested information from LAMC faculty on whether they have had adequate
input in Prop A and AA decisions. Please forward your comments to me.
Senate October
Motions
PRESIDENT'S RESPONSE TO SENATE MOTIONS
November 3, 2004
Motion #1
That the LAMC Academic Senate make a strong statement of support for the PACE
program and for its Director Mark Pursley and that there be full consultation
with the Academic Senate before a final decision is made with regard to the
future of PACE.
Response: Mark Pursley has been
informed that the PACE program will continue as it has up to the present. I agree that there must be a broadly
participatory and comprehensive discussion regarding the PACE program to
include the Office of Academic Affairs and the Academic Senate. This discussion must include such factors as
student success and retention rates as well as relevant budgetary information.
Motion #2
In light of the enrollment crisis, the Academic Senate moves to:
1. Reinstate the high school outreach program under the auspices of the Counseling Department.
2. Give schedule and catalog to all new students
3. Offer classes at Local public high schools with the following conditions:
a. Full approval of the department chairs in the planning, scheduling, and staffing of these classes
b. Scheduling of these classes in compliance with LACCD Board rules, Title 5 regulations, and the California Education Code, thus ensuring that these classes are published in the college schedule and open to the public
Response: The high school
outreach program remains under the auspices of the Counseling Department. It is up to that department to determine
what activities it may continue to conduct.
Any new student who attends an Orientation Workshop sponsored by the
college will receive a free schedule of classes for the appropriate semester as
well as a college catalog. The Office
of Academic Affairs will work with the department chairs to re-establish
classes at local high schools in accordance with prevailing Board rules and state
regulations.
Motion #3
To adopt the Advance Course Draft Present by Maria Fenyes
Response: The Office of
Academic Affairs accepts the policy and procedure document as it was approved
by the Academic Senate.
**************************************************************
1. With regard to the president’s response to Motion #2, Clive Gordon stated that
there was no way to do anything if there were no funds. It was decided to send
the motion back to the president and ask her to answer the questions.
2. Budget- According to the handout, a major chunk of the projected deficit was
the increase in courses to meet our growth goals. It appears that Mission has the
highest projected ending shortfall of any college in the District. Eloise Cantrell
remarked that in 27 years, we have never had the worst deficit in the District.
B. Vice
President, Louise Barbato, handed out four documents.
1. The first, the Advance course policy, was voted on by the senate last month and
forwarded to the college president who accepted it. See above in the president’s report.
2. The second, a Form to apply for advanced standing for a course, was presented
and input was asked for by. Nov. 15 in order to vote on the form at the December
senate meeting.
3. The third, Moving disciplines-, was a draft prepared by Angela Echeverri and
Maria Fenyes at the request of the college president. Again input was sought
so that a vote could take place in December.
4. The final form the request draft for discipline moving, was also presented for input.
Barbato also informed us that because of the new faculty hiring policy and Board Rules, we
need a new faculty hiring process document. Leslie Milke said that we had such a policy
approved here on campus. We will look for it.
C. Treasurer (Margie Long) The regular report was
postponed for December. Long proposed
a motion to raise the three faculty scholarship amounts from $100 each to $200 or $250
starting this year. (MILKE/KUBICK AMENDED BY FENYES) THAT WE RAISE
THE THREE FACULTY SCHOLARSHIPS FROM $100
TO $200 EACH TO
BEGIN 2004-2005
IV. P ublic
Address:
A.
Paul Kubicki spoke
out of concern over cutting the budget for advertising, tutoring, course
offerings, and counseling outreach.
He stated that management’s reason for the drastic cuts was
that the college was over cap for credit enrollment and we
would not get paid for the additional
FTES. According to Kubicki, this was poor thinking on the part
of management. as we are now
below cap and must add classes Winter Spring and Summer. He
added that the college should
give away schedules and mail them out. Management needs to be
more receptive to listening to
the faculty because they are
the ones with the institutional memory.
B. Jan Silver spoke on the progress on the proposed child development building. The
plan was
for a State-funded, two-story building housing the child-care center and classrooms as well as
faculty offices. Architects were hired and the designs were approved, but when the bid went
out it came in at about $6 million rather that the funded $4.4 million. The bid was sent out again
last summer and the lowest reply was $9 million, which is almost twice the State funding Child development faulty and child development center people had a meeting with Karen Hoefel,
District reps, and Prop A reps. They were left feeling that a decision was made to eliminate
the second floor so that the child development center would go there but not the classes.
A meeting was set up for next Tuesday with the president to discuss options. They were told
that there was no firm decision yet. They might ask the State for an extension of the building
time to find more funds, or they might ask to use Prop A money. The latter would have a
domino
effect on the rest of the buildings.
V. Reports of Senate Committee Meetings
A. Curriculum:
1.
Leslie Foster reported that there was a curriculum workshop on
Tuesday, November 2.
She handed out a checklist for writing an integrated course outline. A challenge procedure
was developed as well as a memo for department chairs to develop their specific
departmental challenges. Courses for UC transferability were submitted in September.
We should be notified about approval or
denial by early November.
2. Foster distributed copies of the challenge policy proposed by the curriculum committee.
An issue discussed was that there was no reference to an exam. Foster stated that a
sentence referring to exams will be added at the end of the form. Another issue was that
some wanted this to be a decision of the discipline. Gary Prostak wanted a lot more
detail. Gwen Walker said that people could e-mail the counseling office with more
information.
Paul Kubicki suggested that
there be a sign in admission stating there was a challenge process and to see
counseling for information. Concern
was expressed over making the wording clear that individual Departments
determine the criteria for challenges.
Consequently, it was agreed that an extra sentence should be added:
"Criteria for challenging based on knowledge or ability to succeed will be determined by each Academic Department."
(MSC MILKE/FOSTER) TO APPROVE THE CHALLENGE POLICY.
3.
A vote was held at the District Curriculum Committee to change
“Skills Awards” on
all campuses to “Skills Certificates.” E-65 was approved so that the changes align
the guidelines for CSU general education with IGETC wording. SCIGETC was
approved for the District.
B. District Academic Senate: The December meeting will be held
here at Mission on Thursday,
December 9 at 12:30 in the main room of the campus center. On the agenda with be such topics
as revising the election procedure, discussing goals the year, and discussing a policy to deal with
student cheating.
C. EPAC: The minutes of Tuesday, October 19 were circulated. EPAC recommended approval of
the following draft language. “The DAS supports the right of
students to petition to take
a lower level course after a higher level
course is completed. Each academic senate
shall develop a policy and procedure for
taking a lower level course after completing
a higher level course. The petition shall
include the rationale for taking the lower level
course.” This will now go to the DAS general meeting in December. A Policy on student taking
lower level course after more advanced courses in the same subject are passed was discussed.
Another topic of discussion was courses in English speech and American institutions taken outside
of the United States. They will address the C- grade at the next meeting.
D. Resource Analysis (Angela Echeverri): The committee met on October 27, 2004. The causes
of the $1.4-1.9 million budget shortfall projected for 2004-05 was discussed extensively.
The college received $128,444 in Block grant funds and $126,282 for scheduled maintenance
projects. A proposal to use most of the Block grant funds to replace computers in the LRC
was discussed and then tabled to allow faculty and department chairs to identify instructional
equipment needs they might have. The committee will meet on Wednesday, November 10
at 2:00 p.m. in the PFCR.
E. Institutional Effectiveness (Mark Pursley) The committee met on October 28, 2004.
Deborah Paulsen reported that the Art discipline had completed work on student learning
outcomes for students receiving an AA in Art. John Cantley completed the drafts of the
self-study for administrative units. (President’s Office; Academic Affairs; Administrative
Services); for disciplines; student service units; and counseling. The committee will review
these documents for the November 11 meeting. The committee approved changes to its
charter. Those changes will be presented to the College Council in November. The next
meeting is scheduled for November 11 from noon to 2:00 p.m. in CMPC 2.
VI. Old
Business
A. Report on Senate motions to the College President: See Presidents written report above.
B. Follow-Up on
Prerequisites: See President's report above.
C. Academic Rank for
Part-Time Faculty. Part-Time faculty member, Jeanne Cassara
submitted a proposal for adjunct faculty to be given the rank of Adjunct Assistant Professor.
(MSC MILKE/LONG) TO APPROVE ACADEMIC
RANK FOR ADJUNCTS
VII. New Business
A. Use
of Block Grant Funds— At the Resource Analysis meeting, Vice President
Karen Hoefel suggested using most of the $128,444 in instructional equipment,
Block grant funds to replace the remaining computers in LRC. This was delayed
so that committee members could discuss it with faculty. Do faculty have other
needs? Eloise Cantrell reported that it was upsetting that computer science had
10-year-old computers. Leslie Milke stated that department chairs should be
asked for proposals. Last year there was a process to distribute $200,000 of
Block grant funds to departments based on proposals. Leslie suggested that we
use same process this year. (MSC FENYES/MILKE) MOVE TO ESTABLISH AN “INSTRUCTIONAL EQUIPMENT COMMITTEE” (IEC)
THAT WILL OPERATE UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE AND THE COUNCIL OF
INSTRUCTION. THE COMMITTEE SHALL BE CHARGED WITH THE DISTRIBUTION OF 2004 –
2005 INSTRUCTIONAL EQUIPMENT FUNDS TO INSTRUCTIONAL DEPARTMENTS. THE
INSTRUCTIONAL EQUIPMENT COMMITTEE SHALL BE COMPOSED OF AT LEAST FIVE FULL TIME
REGULAR FACULTY MEMBERS, THREE OF WHOM SHALL BE DEPARTMENT CHAIRS. THE
COMMITTEE SHALL BE RENEWED EVERY ACADEMIC YEAR.
B. Faculty Replacement: Hiring- Since the president has the authority to decide which, if any
Positions are replaced, the senate should inquire which ones she intended to fill. Sandy Thomson
suggested that we ask the president to rely on or work with the faculty hiring committee on
replacements. Then, as the District is falling below the 75/25, find out if new positions are to be
created.
C. Function of Technical Review: There was some confusion as to the exact function of technical
review on courses and updates. Course content should not be corrected in this process.
Maria Fenyes expressed concern over chemistry lab content. Leslie Foster assured her that
technical review was about form and not content.
D. Math/English Graduation Requirements: President Echeverri handed out documents including
resolutions from the Fall ASCCC plenary session dealing with raising the graduation
requirements in math and English. We need to come up with a position here at Mission.
Maria Fenyes suggested a forum in the Spring. This will probably come to a vote at the
Spring plenary session and will involve recommendations for changes in Title 5.
The meeting was adjourned at 3:40 p.m.
Submitted by Dale Newman, Secretary