MPC Academic Senate

September 21, 2006

 

 

 

President's Report

 

Notes

Met with Supportive Services

No commitment

 

 Conversations with Doug Garrison

 

Flex Days

A time for everybody on campus to come together

For Keynote speeches, Presidents’ reports, etc…

 

Also a time primarily for faculty to devote time to things faculty are interested in: like how to be better teachers. All other folks would be welcome to attend if they like.

 

This time could also be used for classified folks to concentrate on staff development issues

 

Ft Ord

 

Doug is hearing:

a need for more info

clarification of intent

examination of expectations

 

Doug has the same needs

 

“We need a consensus of Vision”

“We need to examine our expectations”

 

He is not comfortable that there is a clear vision

We need more info to make good decisions

So that there will be no surprises.

 

At Santa Rosa/Petaluma, Doug developed an educational plan based on assessments of

 

External (what does the service area need)?

And

Internal (dialogue with departments)

Needs

 

The dialogue with departments was a year long effort of asking questions sorta like those in a program review:

What is the situation now?

What do you envision for the future?

What do you need to get there?

 

This produced a big 65 page document which discussed opportunities and facilities

 

and provided a broad-based dialogue and a projection of what they needed to get there.

 

College Council

 

 

Board Policy & Procedure Review Process

Presented by Doug Garrison to the College Council

September 19, 2006

 

President informs PACC and refers

policy/procedure to operational units through VPs

 

        Operational units confer w/parties to

        draft policy/procedure language

 

                     Draft language sent to PACC

                     for referral to constituent groups

 

                             Constituent groups review draft policy/procedures

                             and send comments to PACC; either referred to

                             operational units for revision or to College Council

  

                                      College Council reviews and approves policy/procedures

                                      or sends comments to PACC for further referral

 

                                                 When approved by College Council,

                                                  President forwards final policy/procedures to Board

 

PACC role – Referral and Tracking (confirmation of constituent review)

College Council role – Review & Approval

 

 

Board Policy review is coming.

Many of the sections will be under the purview of the Academic Senate, such as Articulation, Academic Freedom, Grading Symbols, Academic Renewal, etc…

 

College Council discussed a bit how this would all get done.

 

PACC will be in charge of referral of work to different groups (with Academic Senate being one of them) and tracking the progress.

 

PACC will not be in charge of approving the content of the revisions because it is too small a group (9 members) to withstand criticism of Board policy revision/approval.

 

The real review and revision will take place with the various constituent groups.

 

College Council, as *the* broad-based shared governance body on campus, will be in charge of review and approval

 

Once approved by the College Council, the President will take the proposed revisions to the Board.

 

During the meeting, I mentioned that by law, the Academic Senate is the representative body of the faculty that the board must primarily rely on for academic and professional matters. Therefore, why should the College Council be involved in the portions of the Board Policy revisions that are clearly under the purview of the Academic Senate as relating to the 10+1?

 

The general response, mostly from Doug, was that

1) Whereas the Academic Senate is indeed the primary body that should be heard on these issues, it is not the sole body.

2) If, in the end, the Academic Senate and the College Council disagreed on a topic regarding academic and professional issues, he would be bound by law to go with what the Academic Senate recommended.

 

Hartnell Resolution Issue

 

Two faculty members mentioned that this is primarily a union issue.

 

Hazel Ross suggested taking out some of the Whereas clauses, especially those involving the salaries being “lowest in the state” and those involving the term “living wage”.


Executive Committee

 

VP-AA Search -- Next agenda item

 

Academic Senate Budget