Minutes from Social Sciences Task Force Meeting of October 30, 2009

 

The Social Science Task Force met Friday, October 30, 2009 from 1:00 PM to 3:00 PM at Rio Grande Campus in Room 125. The following faculty members were in attendance:  Geoffrey Andron, Karen Bell, Ross Bigelow, Mary Beth Booth, Kristyn Brown, Jack Bucco, Mary Chipley, Carol Hayman, Sherry Heiden, Iris Geisler, Livingstone Kumassah, Michael Petrowsky, Elizabeth Pintar, Michael Pool, Marianna Sidoryanskaya, Gary Smith, James Sondgeroth, and Tiffany Rawlings.

1. The agenda was approved.

                        Agenda:

 

1.       Approve agenda.

2.       Approve minutes from last meeting: http://www.austincc.edu/SOCSCI/Minutes/meet_09_18_09.htm.

                                                3.       Discuss the election results of Data Coach: Jack Bucco is the data coach.

                                                4.       Discuss and take action on approving proposed Master Syllabus for GISC 1401.

                                                5.      Discuss and take action on the academic schedule for ANTH, ECON, and GEOG in the Academic Year 2010-2011.

                                               6.      Discuss and take action on appointing a committee to revise the curriculum for ECS classes.

7.      Discuss and take action on adopting a new instructor packets for Jack Bucco: 1)Study Guide and Workbook for Macroeconomics, ISBN: ECON230102,  and 2) Study Guide and Workbook for    Microeconomics, ISBN:ECON230202.

8.      Discuss and take action on adopting a textbook for a new GISC course, GISC 1401. The text is Integrated Geospatial Technologies: A Guide to GPS, GIS, and Data Logging by Jeff Thurston, Thomas K. Poiker, J. Patrick Moore; ISBN: 978-0-471-24409-7; Hardcover; 280 pages; September 2003. Mary Beth Booth or Bonnie Brown.

9.      Discuss and take action on changing the textbook adoption process for the department. Should we adopt a process that is similar to the one that the Government Department uses? (Details on their process will follow within the week.)

                                                10.     Discuss and take action on planning a departmental party for the late spring (mid-April) on one of the Highland Lakes.

                                                11.  Remind everyone about the Social Science Book Club that will meet after the next Task Force meeting.

12.   Adjourn.


                               

2.      Approve minutes from last meeting: http://www.austincc.edu/SOCSCI/Minutes/meet_09_18_09.htm. Discussion: Jim mentioned that each Social Science Task Force member should review the minutes and report any inaccuracies to rdayton@austincc.edu. Also please make sure to ensure that you are listed as attending each meeting. Voting task force members that attend task force meetings are paid a small stipend of $20.00 per hour at the end of the academic year. The attendance sign-up sheet at the meeting is used to process stipends. The minutes from 09/18/09 were amended to add Geoffrey Andron as attending this meeting. Jack Bucco requested that we allow more time to review the minutes.

Action: The task force tabled the approval of these minutes until our next meeting in order to allow everyone ample time to review them.

 

3.      Discuss the election results of Data Coach: Jim Sondgeroth introduced Jack Bucco as the data coach for the Student Success Initiative for Economics. Jack explained that he had already been to three meetings gathering information on what would be the objective for the data coaches. The goals of the Student Success Initiative seem to be higher graduation rates and higher retention rates. The data coaches have meetings and give recommendations to the department chairs. The data coaches will get information on different age groups, different backgrounds, and statistics on how they do over the years.  Jack said he talked to Kinslow and a consultant on the initiative trying to get more information. Jack explained that the task force will get data from the data coach and then the task force will give input on the reasons for the data and on what you think would achieve certain elements of the SSI.  Jack said the data coaches haven’t decided how they will present the data to the task force but he will make sure to represent the same data to the task force as he receives. The task force will be given input on what you think are the reasons for low retention and low graduation rates. Jack mentioned that 4,534 students started college at ACC for the 1st time in the fall of 2006. By spring 2009 only 21 had graduated from the start of the group. The consulting firm hired by ACC says that it is not a transfer problem. How many people are passing developmental classes. Jack was asked if ACC would reconsider its open door policy. Marianna Sidoryanskaya compared the issue to a policy in Russia and a famous saying that “Even a bear can dance.” Marianna said “that if you can’t teach a bear to dance then you are not a good teacher and perhaps do not belong in this institution”.  Jim Sondgeroth explained from reading the national news and looking on the internet that this is a national trend because the state legislature has become interested in how funds are spent. Medicare is busting the budget and they are wondering whether or not they are getting their monies worth on colleges. Jim said since we are an open door college that is a problem. Jim explained that according to the SSI all instructors would go the extra mile in and out of class to make sure that students are successful. He interpreted the information to say that:” we aren’t going to wait for them to ask us; we are going to assume that they need help.” Kristyn Brown asked if the completion ratio included Academic courses as well as Workforce courses and Jack explained that it only included Academic courses. Michael Petrowsky mentioned that the facts are out there and if only we knew them perhaps we could improve student retention. He further mentioned, “somewhere in all the data they will give the data coach we will see a trend and we can hope to change that and increase our retention rates”. Jack said he would study the data then present it to the task force with some questions and then the task force would relay questions to the data coach and then he would forward it to the department chair. Marianna mentioned that she thought the task force could present the questions and the answers as instructors were much more aware of the issues. Michael Pool asked if Jack could get new forms of data if the social science task force requested it. Mike said that had been an issue for some time in that the task force members can’t get the data we need. Jim mentioned that the task force could discuss via the list serve any particular statistics we would like to request from OIE. Jack mentioned that OIE had done so many studies that they knew how to ask the questions to get the answers. Geoff Andron mentioned that when a student drops out whether it was because the course was too hard or because of boredom or due to transfer students. Mary Booth mentioned that when you start asking for requests of individuals you might be asked to track students in the Academic side as they do on the Workforce side. She further mentioned that it is an incredible amount of work as they have to follow their workforce students for three years and to make sure they are gainfully employed. Jim said he sent a whole list of data that he wanted to the head of OIE and was never provided that information. He spoke with someone in the SSI and mentioned that we have some ideas of goals we would like to reach but they told him the goals for the SSI were already set. Geoff Andron said that our strategy needed to be an educational one and that we have various mechanisms we could use to reveal to people with a preconceived agenda that they are asking the wrong questions. He added further that it was not a safe assumption to assume that you will improve the quality of education through the steps taken in things such as the SSI when you need to possibly have the administration do things such as not allowing certain people in.

 

4.      Discuss and take action on approving proposed Master Syllabus for GISC 1401. Mary Beth Booth briefly mentioned that the long title means it is Intro to GPS class but the THECB on workforce side regulates everything you do. You have to use their title and their syllabus, and so she plugged all of that into our syllabus and this is it. Action: The Task force approved the syllabi. (CLICK HERE to view master syllabus for GISC 1401.)

 

5.      Discuss and take action on the academic schedule for ANTH, ECON, and GEOG in the Academic Year 2010-2011. Jim Sondgeroth mentioned that we could just roll over the schedule. The task force looked at the schedules online for Anthropology, Economics and Geography for fall 2010.

 

Discussion for Anthropology:Lizzie asked that the Friday only Honors Physical Class be added to the fall 10 schedule. There will be a change for all three disciplines next fall we will be offering daytime classes at Round Rock. There will be two Anthropology, two Geography and four Economics classes at the new Round Rock campus. Lizzie asked to add a 12 week class at NRG. Rachel and Jim will add 12 week classes in the 1st week of the fall or spring semester so if there are a number of cancelled classes at NRG because of RRC then we will try to remember to add it in. We will try to add it in now and if don’t have room then we will readdress the issue after class cancellation for 16week NRG classes. A Physical and a Cultural Anthropology twelve week class should be added in the NRG. Jim pointed out the new RRC classes that are already on the schedule. Karen Bell asked for an Archaeology class at CYP. Lizzie Pintar mentioned that we had offered that in the past and it didn’t make in the evenings. Lizzie was concerned that the Archaeology class would draw students from the NRG Archaeology class. Karen mentioned that both of her ANTH classes were full and that the people that go to CYP generally don’t go to NRG and vice versa. A discussion ensued about the economy and the likelihood that classes remain full as they were this fall. We will offer a CYP Anth 2302 in the morning on MW and if it doesn’t make we won’t offer it again. Jim proposed another section at CYP on TTh because of the high demand report stating this section did fill up. The task force will add a Cultural Anthropology on TTh at CYP at a different time.  Jim mentioned that the sections at EVC did not do well and often were cancelled. The task force decided to leave RVS alone. A discussion ensued about the number of distance learning classes and the LEH that faculty were paid. Jim explained that those that taught their full load and an overload would be paid pro-rata for the overload. The Dean will use the PCM LEH to determine what your overload pay will be as a proportion of your full pay based on the proportion of students left. If your course was full after adds and drops and then 6 people dropped out in the next week before the 12th class day, they will pay you 5/6th of what they would normally pay. The Dean said that they were discussing changing the administrative rule. The Administration wanted to change it and pay the way they do in lecture courses but that the fulltime faculty senate thought that would harm faculty so they opposed the change and prevented it from being implemented(influenced by History department).

Discussion regarding Economics: Marianna mentioned that there were too many classes at CYP in Econ. The task force looked at last fall’s numbers and saw that the registration numbers were very good and most likely full in the beginning. Marianna mentioned that we have two of the same classes back to back. It was decided we couldn’t eliminate a section because they were too many students for one class. Jim mentioned that he has taught here for over 30 years and had never seen this type of enrollment at ACC. Michael Petrowsky mentioned that Round Rock might take students away from CYP. Jim mentioned that he will argue that this is a transitional year and that if there are endangered sections he will say that we will change them next year. Jim mentioned that there are three RRC classes and expressed concern that the RRHEC would remain open. The task force seemed unaware that both Round Rock campuses would remain open and were concerned about whether or not all sections could get enough students enrolled to make. Jim proposed eliminating the RRHEC classes, however after looking up the classes he saw that they did very well. The task force felt the RRHEC would compete with RRHC but would wait and see how enrollment panned out. Michael Petrowsky explained that the two campuses were not in walking distance of each other. A discussion ensued about the withdrawal rates on 12 week classes. Mary Chipley mentioned that a lot of her 12 week students had abandoned her course before it even started. Iris Geisler mentioned that she had never had the amount of students listed as enrolled current in her course actually attend her classes.

Discussion regarding Geography: Mary Beth Booth asked that her Hybrid GEOG 2470 change to one night a week because the enrollment was much better when it met one night a week. Ross wanted to change the GEOG class in FBG to Wednesday night. Rachel mentioned that this class had not rolled over into the schedule and Ross asked that we add the FBG class to Wed once we had a time and room number. Mary Beth mentioned that she needed to add a web based GIS class at a later date. Mary Beth mentioned that Gaye Lynn and Jim met and came to an agreement that due to workforce requirements the word load for both Mary Beth and Jim would be too great to keep the departments together so we are splitting GIS workforce department. Jim mentioned that Mary Beth is forming a hiring committee for the position of fulltime GIS Faculty and Department Chair and that the application deadline was Jan 8th.   The interviews will start in February. Jim mentioned that since we have no enrollment figures from 2010 we could go back to spring of 2009 to see what enrollment figures were while keeping in mind what we are offering in 2010. Mary Beth asked if we have the options to wait until next spring. Lizzie Pintar proposed rolling it over and discussing this once spring starts. Action: The task force approved rolling the current schedules over with minor tweaking taking place after seeing the spring 2010 enrollment figures.

6.      Discuss and take action on appointing a committee to revise the curriculum for ECS classes. Jim Sondgeroth mentioned the numerous problems with early college start including trying to find enough instructors to teach these sections. Jim believed we had 14 or 15 ecs sections this semester of which a majority fall at the exact same times. The reason new adjuncts generally have to teach these sections is because fulltime faculty and adjunct faculty in the 1st and 2nd rounds don’t choose to teach them. Therefore most of these classes are staffed by completely new adjuncts of which many of them have never taught before. We do have a few senior adjuncts who like to teach ECS because of the opportunity for overloads. Jim would like a common syllabus and common textbook and possibly a common departmental final for ecs classes. Jim would like to form a committee of economists to get this together and meet regarding these issues. Jim mentioned that sometimes we don’t hear about the problems at high school campuses because newly hired adjuncts feel that if they complain that might jeopardize future assignments. Mary Beth suggested that since these folks are new to teaching they might not even realize that a certain deficiency or issue is a problem. Jim suggested that a common syllabus and curriculum will ensure that all ECS students successfully finish a class would cover all topics we felt important so that when they go to college they won’t feel they have been short changed. Jim mentioned that it’s easier to go along with the attitude in high schools. While some are excellent, some suggest we aren’t flexible enough. Kristyn Brown suggested that we have a lot of ECS students that come to college campuses so why not have all ECS classes on college campuses rather than on high school campuses. Jim said we have tried to do this but for example at NRG there are no rooms available. Jim mentioned that they do not want the ECS students to have to leave the high school campus and come back. Jim mentioned that he had some students in his distance learning classes that were in high schools in outlying areas where we aren’t offering ECS classes on their campuses yet. Jack mentioned that when the ECS students come to campus they seem to understand that they need to behave a bit better. He mentioned that on high school campuses they will test you the first week for sure. The high schools often pull students out of class for various activities, and these interruptions interfere with students successfully completing the courses. Michael Petrowsky mentioned that virtually 99 percent of the students in ECS classes at ACC are not going to enroll at ACC fulltime after graduation. They are taking whatever they can take and then move on. Michael mentioned that “indirectly there is a suboptimsization problem in the sense that ECS affects graduation rates. If you know a low percentage of students graduate than ECS is contributing to that”.  Jim said our goal should be to increase the percentage of students that transfer. Jim felt that a common syllabus, text and department final would help the adjuncts who would be teaching these courses as their first courses. Mary Beth asked if Jim was worried about the success of a departmental syllabus, etc and the idea that if that is so successful should it be implemented in regular college classes. Mary Beth made a motion to form a committee of Economists to explore and report back. Marianna asked why we had to explore the idea and not just do it. Jim mentioned that if we do this and can pass it in April then it could be implemented in ECS classes this next fall. Marianna asked for a vote now to form a committee to do it. Kristyn Brown mentioned that she was thinking that if she were a brand new adjunct a packet with teaching materials would be very beneficial. Michael Petrowsky mentioned that after having taught those classes and observing those classes the new adjuncts are really lost lambs. He observed an adjunct working off a flip chart with students coming in late and as they pleased and felt it was a quality control issue. He felt that in high schools they are worried about their own programs and our success is secondary to their mission. Jim mentioned that this is a management problem. We have fourteen to fifteen high schools around, and there is no way he can observe all or even hear about whether a good job is being done. With a common syllabus and textbooks, etc might help. Iris Geisler asked if we can send this information to the schools so that they will know what the instructors will need to teach this class. Jim mentioned that we do send out a list to ECS instructors with the things you should expect from your students. The teachers have to tell Jim if these needs aren’t being met. Iris suggested we give the same package to the school. Kristyn said to tell them this is the expectation. Jim mentioned that our office should send out a message to everyone asking them how it is going. Kristyn Brown said she taught under a departmental exam for seven years and it ensured that all teachers taught the basics but with flexibility to cover extra things so it was not necessarily a rigid thing. Geoff Andron said he taught at Houston Tillitson College for ten years and had huge experience with disruptive kids and having a  syllabus with list of topics he had to cover would have been harmless. Geoff further mentioned that “ if we want to improve this you need to teach the faculty how to do it by requiring them to take the “Joe Peschi” two week seminar in classroom management”. He suggested that we should orient the teachers that they have to teach an attitude adjustment to their students and if we focus on how to turn every instructor into a person that can handle  all the different disciplinary situations they would have more successful experiences. Marianna mentioned that the only fulltime faculty who had taught ECS classes on high school campuses were Jack Bucco, Michael Petrowsky and herself. Some fulltime faculty have to travel all over the city and be present during the first or second week of classes to make sure that all things were working properly. She felt that fulltime faculty should and can take this responsibility upon themselves. Jim mentioned that the high schools are in outlying areas that are difficult to cover. Action: Mike Pool moved for a motion to approve a committee to form these master syllabi, etc. Geoff Andron was opposed. Mike Pool moved that the chair of the task force appoint the committee.

 

7.      Discuss and take action on adopting a new instructor packets for Jack Bucco: 1)Study Guide and Workbook for Macroeconomics, ISBN: ECON230102,  and 2) Study Guide and Workbook for Microeconomics, ISBN:ECON230202. Jim mentioned that we never got a chance to look at the packets through the duplication center but that he does have them available online if anyone wants to view them. The packets are a lecture outline of Jack’s classes and will be reproduced by the duplication center at a cost of around $13.30 per student. Mary Chipley asked if this packet was the same as the study guide she purchased and used when she took his class. Jack said that this was a different version and that the old one was about 60 pages. Jack mentioned that he was in the process of writing a text and in the text you would fill in the blanks in the manual and then in the manual they would do the study guide problems. For example in the textbook he would right down the definition of economics and then in study guide it would say the definition of economics. Mary Chipley mentioned that she wasn’t sure she would have made an A in the course if she didn’t have the study guide since Economics is not her skill set. Jack mentioned that last month was an intense meeting and that he didn’t mean to take advantage of students and felt that everyone knew when he was hired that he had a royalty rate and knew he collected a royalty from it. He mentioned that he had done it for nine years. He added to the study guide and the publisher added to the price of it without consulting him. He didn’t want to take a sabbatical for it although he knew that others in the same situation had done so and been paid for their time to create the material. Jim mentioned he could apply for a sabbatical  now. Jack mentioned that he offered to photocopy the study guide and give it to the students for nothing. Geoff Andron mentioned that the outside publisher might take issue with Jack taking away revenue from them. Jim mentioned that if the outside publisher would oppose it then we would have to vote on whether or not to adopt the outside publisher’s version and it may not be adopted and therefore they wouldn’t make any revenue. Jim mentioned that he felt he could get the votes in the task force to not approve the textbook. Geoff Andron was confused to why it wouldn’t be approved. Jim mentioned that the text was published by a custom publisher and that we can send it around and we will see if it meets the standards of our task force and if it does then we will approve it. Jack again mentioned that when he was hired faculty knew he wrote his study guide and collected royalties. Jim mentioned that we were simply here to approve or not approve the packet being reproduced by ACC’s duplication. Jack wished to reiterate his position. Jim mentioned that if Jack had trouble with the publisher than that was his problem. Jack mentioned that he had not thought about the publishing issue but that he just wanted the issue to die down.  Jim reiterated that all we are doing now is trying to approve the books published by ACC’s duplication center. Action: Jack Bucco’s study guide was approved by the task force.

 

8.      Discuss and take action on adopting a textbook for a new GISC course, GISC 1401. The text is Integrated Geospatial Technologies: A Guide to GPS, GIS, and Data Logging by Jeff Thurston, Thomas K. Poiker, J. Patrick Moore; ISBN: 978-0-471-24409-7; Hardcover; 280 pages; September 2003. Mary Beth Booth or Bonnie Brown. Mary Beth mentioned that a new course is being offered this spring that already has fourteen students signed up and we need to get a text ordered as soon as possible. It is from 2003 but all principles are still the same and the instructor Bonnie Brown felt this book was more affordable to the students. The text that she actually wanted was newer but it costs more than 200.00 per book. Action: This text was approved to be added to the adoption list. 

 

9.      Discuss and take action on changing the textbook adoption process for the department. Should we adopt a process that is similar to the one that the Government Department uses?  Jim Sondgeroth mentioned that Rachel had presented tables of textbook usages for all course and the number of sections that each book is used in. A lot of textbooks have zero people using these texts in the semester. Michael Pool mentioned that you may not have the opportunity to teach a course and therefore haven’t taught it in two years. Once you do teach the course the text you want to use is potentially not on the list and that could be a problem. Jim mentioned that government department has a policy that a text has to be used in at least 10% of the sections to remain on the list. Jim mentioned that is their current rule and that the second policy they have is that except for new courses, changes to the approved list will only occur in one meeting a year in late spring. Jim mentioned that the other problem might be that one adjunct instructor has asked for a book and they are the only one using that book and their the class that we ordered the book for at say SAC is cancelled for low enrollment and then we move the instructor to a different campus. The bookstore has a difficult time getting them switched over. Mary Beth mentioned that we shouldn’t consider removing any books that are used for summer only classes. Michael Pool opposed the 10% policy and felt that if an instructor wanted to use a text they should be able to use it. If over a certain period of time it hasn’t been used then it should be removed. Mary Beth mentioned this could be very difficult for GIS because the information changes all the time and several books chosen in the past have proved not to be as effective as originally thought. Mike Pool mentioned that he can potentially teach six different sections.Mike Pool recommended that Rachel compose a list of the textbooks being used over the last three years and those that hadn’t been used be put on a report given to the task force for possible removal. Mary Chipley wondered why we would limit our choices if it was just maintaining a list and not having to keep books on hand. Jim mentioned that by simply having to have the text approved by the task force we were somewhat limiting the choice. Mike Pool mentioned that no one used the Adventures in Fugiwiland. Mary Beth asked why Jim wanted to propose this change. Jim mentioned that it was a problem with management and with staffing classes and that also it is beneficial for the students. In classes like Economics there will be used textbooks available the next semester. If one semester a professor  teaches Macro and the next semester Micro and no one else uses the text that could be a problem. Jim mentioned that most Economics textbooks were basically the same. Tiffany Rawlings mentioned that the book she got stuck with using in her Cultural class at the Pinnacle doesn’t go at all with how she teaches the course. There is a large difference in Cultural Anthropology books. Jim mentioned that there were 29 sections in physical anthropology with 10 percent being three sections. It would eliminate Jurmain and Kilgore Essentials text.  The only one that would still be left is the Intro to Physical by Jurmain. Jim mentioned that it would be fall and spring combined. He mentioned that the only one in jeopardy was one just added. Mike Pool suggested that every semester Rachel look at what textbooks have been used after the last two years. We would have to put in things for special courses or study abroad courses. Jim mentioned there are nine sections all together and that would eliminate Renfrow. Karen mentioned that one of them is Kevin Price and it is because she hasn’t taught the class in a few years but as soon as she teaches it again she will be using it. Mary Beth mentioned a different proposal that all Anthropologist, Economist and Geographers get together and look at the list and decide what isn’t being used then come back and present a list to the task force for removal. Mike mentioned that he would like the information regarding how often they have been used. Jim mentioned that in Government they went from 14 books to 8. Geoff asked how this improved the government department. Jim mentioned that after switching around sections the books were much more available at the bookstore. Geoff mentioned that the second hand books do not come from ACC they are probably from a national book market. Geoff felt that there were two numbers that were important, the number of books on the list. There are sound arguments for reducing the books on the list because they become obsolete so it is a good idea to review books every couple of years. Geoff questioned why it was necessary to arbitrarily reduce the number of books that we teach out of and he felt that was a serious mistake. He felt we were already regimenting by having a common syllabus and departmental wide exam but eventually there will be nothing for the faculty members to care about. Geoff mentioned that he teaches out of two textbooks but is thinking about teaching out of four. He wanted to switch books for his Honors class because they can handle the harder work. He felt adamantly that it wasn’t right to tell instructors they couldn’t use a certain book since you should assume that your faculty are competent and capable of making an educational decision. Action: Mary Beth proposed the motion prior to our next task force meeting that the different programs find a time to get together and look at the proposed list and then decide which ones to get rid of based on past use and future use and bring it back to the task force. Mike Pool suggested we needed a continuing policy to review the texts every year or whichever the discipline decided on. Mary Beth motion that the 3 disciplines will meet and decide on books and at that time will decide how long they want to review it with a maximum of two years. Mike Pool wanted clarification on whether that included adoption and it did not. It was clarified that the discipline would decide how long to wait. A vote was taken with nine four and two against. The Chair should decide who is responsible in each discipline to get everyone together.

10.  Discuss and take action on planning a departmental party for the late spring (mid-April) on one of the Highland Lakes. Michael Petrowsky mentioned that this had come up before after the fall party and suggested a lake party. Michael Petrowsky’s partner Carol had a successful party on the lake. The prices vary with Lake Travis being the most expensive. Jim mentioned that we would father donations from all but lean a little heavier on full time than adjunct. The rental usually is for about four or five hours and will hold about fifty people. Michael Petrowsky mentioned that the boat rentals he was looking at did not include food and that you had to bring your own food on. Jim mentioned that he as department chair and Michael Petrowsky and Marianna will move forward on planning this. The food would be a potluck.

11.  Remind everyone about the Social Science Book Club that will meet after the next Task Force meeting. The Social Science book club third meeting is first week of December. The book is Institutions and the Path to the Modern Economy: Lessons from Medieval Trade, by Avner Grief. The book is about how institutions develop in a historical sense and game theory. Michael mentioned that there is some mathematics in it but that for those who don’t feel comfortable it is written in a way that you can bypass that. We might ask Scott Tyson to make a presentation about this topic. Jim reminded everyone that you get six hours of faculty development credit for participating in the discussion. It should be right after our next task force meeting.

12.A motion was made to adjourn. The meeting ended at 3:30p.m.