Present:   Nancy A. Brown, David Balogh, Jay Siskin, Helene Jara, Lisa Feintech, Topsy Smalley, Steve Hodges, Rory O’Brien, Marcy Alancraig, Nancy K. Brown, David Sullivan, Donna Mekis, Mary Ellen Sullivan, Louis Compoginis, Celia Rabinovitch, Olivia Hand

Guests:, Debbie Analauren, Andre Neu, Claire Biancalana, Denise Lim, Virginia Coe, Jim Mack, Debora Bone, Matt Escover, John Devalcourt, Spiro Politis, Dorothy Nunn, Don. Jenson, Nancy Fetterman,  Sylvia Winder, Laura Thompson-Dickie
 

Staff:        Bronze Freeman

I. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 3:23pm

II. Minutes
David Sullivan moved to approve the minutes of May 14, 2002. Mary Ellen seconded the motion. The motion to approve was passed unanimously.

III. Reports
A. Senate Resignation- Nancy A. Brown
Chuck Smith has resigned from the Senate. The Senate President can appoint an At-Large Representative; Nancy inquired if the Senate would prefer to appoint a replacement privately. Please provide suggestions for a candidate to Nancy or David.

B. Academic Senate- Nancy A. Brown
A Geo-Cluster meeting of the Academic State Senate will be held on October 18 from 8:00am to 4:00pm in Room 1804. This meeting is prior to the fall session; Sioux City Catering will provide the lunch. Topics for discussion will be the new accreditation standards, etc.

C. Fall Plenary Session- Nancy A. Brown
The session will meet October 31 to November 2 in San Francisco. Please access the web site, www.academicsenate.com for more information. If you are interested in attending, please complete the appropriate paperwork; Senate funds will be used.

D. California Master Plan- Nancy A. Brown
The second draft of the new California Master Plan for Higher Education is available; please read it. You may access the plan at www.sen.ca.gov/masterplan/ through the document link. The web page is good in that the legislature is inviting comments.

E. Mandates of Faculty Senate- David Balogh
David had passed out the mandates by which the Faculty Senate operates. David noted that the role and responsibilities of the Senate are different than those of the Union.

F. Meeting- David Balogh
The Senate is invited to Michael Mangin’s house tonight between 5:30pm and 7:30pm to meet with the Union.

G. Elections- David Balogh
As indicated in the minutes, the elections will be held this fall; candidates are needed for both the President and Vice President seats.

H. SEIU- Helene Jara
There is no report.

I. Treasurers Report- Steve Hodges
There is no report.

J. Representative for Secretary- David Balogh
The Secretary is an executive position and will assist the President. The position is “productive but non-compensatory” and the term is for two years. Only a Senator may fill the position.

IV. Action Items
A. Math 502 Mapping Request- Nancy Fetterman
Math has a tutorial program and would like it offered at the Watsonville Center. As per Wanda Garner, Math 502 is tutorial, and not a formal Math class. Nancy Fetterman would like Math 502 mapped to English, Reading, ESL and DSPS. Steve moved to approve the course-mapping request. Lisa seconded the motion. The motion was approved unanimously.

1. Old Business
A. New Accreditation Standards- Nancy A. Brown
Rory distributed a handout titled, “Learner Outcomes and the new Accreditation Standards from The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC)”. Nancy A. noted that the Faculty Senate had approved the resolution suggested by the State Senate for a moratorium on the implementation of the new standards. On the other hand for the past four years, Claire Biancalana has set up, and funded a Learner Outcomes Institute that has brought Cabrillo College to the forefront in preparedness for the new standards.

Rory summarized the issues covered in the handout. Draft C has been adopted; the changes have not been made to the web site yet and the new standards are basically predicated on Learner Outcomes. Rory noted that #6 of the handout describes the concerns of the State Academic Senate. Nancy remarked that Draft C could be downloaded as a pdf from www.accjc.org; the handout contains what is of most interest.

Rory remarked that the ideas were interesting, challenging at the course level, but could not see how it could be done effectively at the program level and institutional levels. The stress is on stated Learner Outcomes: to identify and establish. Rory noted that it would be difficult to do at a higher level. Rory requested that the Senators read the new standards. Rory noted his surprise that the Accreditation had accepted the standards, especially for Student Services and the Library it is not clear how the standards are stated and measured. Rory also understood that faculty evaluations would be dependent to some extent on how well faculty achieved the Learner Outcomes Nancy remarked that the new Master Plan discussed the Governing Board agreeing to compensation on the basis of performance of faculty.

Marcy noted that Accreditation had been vague about how to assess and measure, but referring to Page 5 of the handout, #3a, b and c noted that this was now the definition of what outcomes should be. Marcy expressed her concerns and asked for the guidance of the Faculty Senate. Marcy’s concern is that Learner Outcomes are helpful in the classroom, the Learner Outcome Institute has been helpful for the faculty “to get together”, Cabrillo College is “teacher centered” and Marcy does not want to lose that, but Marcy would like to support the Academic Senate in their request for a moratorium. Marcy noted that she would be presenting at a panel in October on what Cabrillo College is doing and that she is receiving reassign time from Claire to be the Assessment Center Coordinator. Marcy noted the need for faculty undergoing instructional planning to receive training.

Jay reminded the Senate that when they had voted on the moratorium issue, the option had been left open and does not see an inconsistency with #2; the focus is on accreditation and self-study, and the college is not there yet. Both Nancy and Claire stated that Hoke Simpson had asked for all colleges to refuse and resist the new standards. Nancy remarked that Marty Hittleman would like the legislature to consider a new Accreditation Committee. David Balogh noted that Cabrillo College should support the State Senate and should continue, “to do what we are doing”. David noted that the new standards would pass only if 72% of the schools “are on board for the new Accreditation Standards”. Marcy noted that when Learner Outcomes began, it was done  from the interest of teaching and not from accreditation and remarked on the importance of everyone being on board and not waiting until the next accreditation self-study is done in two years.

Topsy distributed an article entitled, “The Chronicle Index of For-Profit Higher Education”. Topsy noted that For-profit higher education schools are not accredited, so student’s are unable to transfer to accredited schools. It had occurred to Topsy that there existed a relationship between for-profit schools and the new standards and had written to both Peter Ewell, who is pushing for the Learner Outcomes and to Dr. Jack Hernandez, Chair of the WASC Committee who had adopted the standards. Peter Ewell had responded that there is a relationship between for-profit schools and the Learner Outcomes, “but an indirect one”. Topsy has not heard back yet from Dr. Hernandez. Nancy A. noted that business people are a part of Accreditation and “maybe they do not have the same values as we do”.

Celia asked if distinctions were being made between objectives and outcomes. Topsy responded in the negative, the student’s would have to show what they had learned. Celia requested the membership of the Accreditation Committee. Celia noted that she had worked for a for-profit school, UC Extension that had been redesigned in the 1950’s and 1960’s by the industrialist, Clark Kerr. Celia believes the standards are written badly in terms of philosophy and limited to quantitative measurements. David Balogh noted that Celia’s comments were close to those of the State Academic Senate. David remarked that the new standards are not understandable, and “this has what’s led to this fight”.

Nancy K. added that if a school received funding from the Department of Education, there are now standards that will become performance based for 0-5 months old children to measure Learner Outcomes, the “desired outcomes”.

Topsy noted that 430,000.00 students attend for-profit schools, and only 23% or fewer for-profit schools are accredited by regions. Topsy remarked that the British “went through this first, gave up on Learner Outcomes and now do academic audits, which are worse.” Rory commented on the need to consider where Cabrillo College and the State Academic Senate should move from here. Rory noted that he and Marcy are looking for permanent members for the subcommittee. Rory noted that he and Bill Hill would do a model in Political Science to experiment with Learner Outcomes. Rory asked that the Senate please provide input. Marcy noted the need to continue the discussion to generate ideas. Nancy A. concurred and noted that discussion should at least continue through the fall Senate meetings. David Balogh jokingly remarked that
 “ the nice thing about education, if get far enough behind can be in the forefront”. David remarked that he was glad that he had attended the Learner Outcome Institute meetings and noted that it was important that “we can all learn to improve our jobs”. Debbie Analauren noted the two issues, 1) keeping Learner Outcomes for assessment and 2) making individual decisions on the classroom level and determining what “works for us before someone tells us how to do it”. Debbie noted that the standards could not be bureaucratized; it would not work.

V. Information Items
A. Fall Meeting Dates- Nancy A. Brown
Nancy distributed the fall meeting dates.  Nancy would not like to meet on December         17 as the date falls during Exam Week. December 17 will be held as an emergency   meeting only date.

B. Academic Priority Process- Nancy A. Brown
In the new regulation the terminology “Division Chair” was replaced with “Division Dean”. This process was discussed last term. The Deans would like to vote, but the process does not allow them to vote on certain issues. For example, Rock Pfotenhauer could not forward a Work Experience position. Please read the process; this issue will be discussed at the next meeting.

Debbie inquired if there would be a discussion of the “frozen positions”. Nancy clarified that the decision was from last year, there would be a new decision regarding positions this year. Nancy remarked that the contract faculty, compared to the rest of the college, “has not grown”. Nancy remarked on the need to determine why interest has been placed in “other areas of the college, but not on faculty”. Nancy would like the energy of the Senate and the support of the Union to hire more contract faculty.  Nancy noted that Claire Biancalana had not had a choice regarding the hiring “freeze”; “the money is drying up”. Nancy noted the need to look at the future of the college and the teaching profession.

VI. Agenda Building
2. Academic Priority Process
3. Naming programs and courses. Mary Ellen noted that the document would be sent to Nancy A. Mary Ellen would like the faculty to understand the impact of name changes.
4. Curriculum
VII. Items From the Floor
Nancy A. reiterated that the Union and Faculty Senate would continue to work together to work out the reorganization “bugs”. Please inform your constituents of this.

VIII. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 4:40pm.