Non-credit repeatability resolution Follow up on getting Alan
Haffa and Mark Clements in touch with Michelle Pilati, Treasurer of the ASCCC.
Still need to make the Flex Day Scheduling Committee a
Bylaws are on the Flex Day Info page.
Clarification from the April 10 meeting about updates re the
Basic Skills Committee. From the minutes:
g. Motion to ask Basic Skills committee to make quarterly
report to the Senate on the project, including resource allocation and
i. Second (MS)
1. How will Admin and BSI committee communicate?
2. John G. can present reports on financials as they are
3. John G sees parallel with Ed Center, in that both are
reported upon without getting into specific details at too granular a level.
4. Suggestion to have a Senator on the BSI who can report to
Senate. Terria suggested.
5. The BSI project is giving MPC the opportunity to change
the culture and we may need to make a leap of faith in this process
iii. Unanimous approval.
We need a big bold line that designates those committees that
make resource allocation decisions: College Council.
Clean up Ed Center Committee relationship.
Our Academic Senate Ed Center Committee has dissolved. We
need to communicate with the main Ed Center Committee. Stephanie Tetter?
Faculty Hire Prioritization Process.
In process of discussion at AAAG.
This document is going to SSAG for review.
This is a "snapshot in time" of an on-going discussion.
There is not complete agreement at AAAG.
At the beginning of the semester, we created a joint Academic
Senate -- MPCTA committee on Distance Ed.
The following are their recommendations. The membership
Fail, Stephanie Tetter, Mark Bishop, Susan Steele.
The following are recommendations. Gail doesn't really expect
anything to happen until we get the dean on line (so to speak) next academic
I suggest we table these recommendations until next academic
year when we can consider them and decide what to do next.
Here are their recommendations:
Appropriate compensation for designing an on-line class.
Except when a teacher uses a canned class, we recommend a
stipend, with 50% paid up front and 50% paid after the class makes. The amount
of the stipend would be negotiable, but other colleges do this, in the range of
between $2,500 and $6,000.
2. Appropriate load factor for an on-line class.
Should be the same as in a face to face class. If we set the
limits for stunt numbers reasonably, it should not be a hugely increased work
3. Class size limits.
We feel strongly that large classes (more then 25) are a pedagogical
We recommend setting a limit to class size with the caveat that the size could
be increased with instructor approval.
4. Proprietary rights.
There should be language in the contract, giving the faculty
member who developed the class ownership of the class for a set period after
he/she leaves MPC. Many campuses have a three yr limit. After that, someone else
can teach the class exactly as designed by the original faculty member. In
addition, our faculty should be able to teach their classes at other schools.
5. Standards of academic rigor and currency of curriculum.
Our inclination is to trust the teachers. We recommend a good training class
(or several) for new teachers, where high standards are modeled. The course
outline should include info on how the class will be run.
6. Integrity of testing and assessment.
This is a major issue of academic integrity and should be addressed by the
campus as a whole. It should be included in the DE manual. We did not come up
with a solution to the problem.
7. The effects of distance ed classes in reducing enrollment in on-campus
We recommend that admin ask Rosaleen to do some analyses on this. If records
are not available, we should start keeping them as we add on-line sections of
our regular classes. We also would like to know whether adding DE classes has
increased general enrollment, assuming this can be determined.
8. Addition of more distance ed classes.
We recommend the development of a DE plan and manual, under the leadership of
the new dean in charge of that area. We need a market analysis. Currently the
college has no real plan for the development of DE education, and no data for
making a plan.
9. Evaluation of distance ed instructors:
We have recommended language for evaluation of distance ed
classes, and this is being used in a pilot program during Spring of 08.
10. Review and revise as appropriate article 15.12.1-Presence on campus.
We recognize there may come a time when a teacher living out of
the area may be given a full load in DE. This is a decision the administration
will have to make, but generally we are opposed to such a situation.
For a local teacher doing some part of his/her load in DE and some
in face to face classes, he/she has the same responsibilities for office hrs,
service on committees, etc. Maybe some language could be added that allows the
contract requirement for presence on campus to be modified if done in writing
with the signature of a dean.
We recommend the development of a new DE plan. We will also need a
regular revision of our current manual, to include such things as best
practices, assessment methods, how evaluations are done, and the nuts and bolts
stuff a new teacher needs to know. Some of this is already in place in Sharon
We need effective training, not just an hour or two with Bruce.
Overload limits are already set in the contract, and we cannot see
the need for setting different ones for DE classes. We also think that allowing
a huge overload in DE classes will prevent the intsructor from delivering a