- Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as written.
- Approval of February 25 and March 27 Minutes
Both sets of minutes were approved as written.
- President's Report
This month's President's report focused primarily on two issues. The first of these dealt with the current process for scheduling course offerings. Mike noted that certain aspects of this process, based on input from a variety of sources, did not seem to be working particularly well. The consensus view of the Senate was that the process should be modified. Some discussion ensued at this point as to what aspects of the current process were a problem. Some specific areas of concern are: the College has moved decision making for an academic process to an administrative level; communication with academic personnel with knowledge of programmatic issues has not been effective; some courses are not being offered in appropriate formats; some course offerings in alternative formats are not effectively linked to related offerings; logistically, having all course offerings input by the Provosts' offices has resulted in a high error rate, causing significant time to be spent on corrections. Further discussion of this issue was deferred to agenda item 8.
Mike also reported on the work of the ad-hoc committee to review significant aspects of the reorganization. Assignment of adjunct faculty to specific courses will be moved from the Directors of Academic Support to Program Coordinators (single campus disciplines) or Assistant Deans (multi-campus disciplines). Job descriptions and compensation levels for Task Force Chairs, Assistant Deans, and Program Coordinators were reviewed. Mike noted that the final package was, of course, not everything that we requested. However, we did make significant progress toward creating a structure in which people can realistically perform the functions of their positions. One of the most significant aspects of the package is the reintroduction of release time into the overall compensation package. Our overall release time this year had been cut by approximately 64%. This package regains most of that (we are still about 200 hours short, collegewide). In short, it may not be everything we want, but we got a lot of what we were asking for. In regards to administrative concern about release time, the Senate noted that this is not "free time." It is simply work reassignment that acknowledges the actual work faculty are doing.
Mike also noted that the officers have been meeting with some Board members for breakfast, and they will continue meeting with others when possible.
- Audit and Elections Committee Report
Results of the Full-Time Faculty Senate election are: Joe Lostracco is President-Elect
- Northridge Senators: Sheila Ammons, Cathy Angell, Laura Ore, Charles Quinn, Tony Ramirez, Pamela Perry
- Rio Grande Senators: Mary Kohls, Dorothy Martinez, Rick Thompson, Maggie Miller, Nick Sarantakes, Judy Sanders
- Riverside Senators: Denise Anding, Marilyn Burke, Irineu Glajar, Louise Hasty, Carol Hirsh, Charlene Morris, Marita Peppard
- Cypress Creek Senator: Andres Tijerina
- Pinnacle Senator: runoff between Judy Scholl and Jim Sondgeroth
5. Consideration of Process for Program Coordinators 1 and 2
As a part of the negotiations discussed in the President's report, the Senate was given authority to decide how Task Force Chairs and Program Coordinators are designated 1 or 2. (For this year, because of time constraints, the Task Force Chair designation was determined by the administration.) The Senate discussed this issue, and agreed that these decisions should be handled through the academic structure. Specifically, the decision should be made by the appropriate Associate Vice-president and Deans, with input from Task Force Chairs and/or Program Coordinators. It was also felt that the criteria for the decisions should be made explicit and public. The factors used to determine Task Force Chair level included such factors as contact hours, number of adjunct faculty in the area, sections taught and complexity (as in how many different areas taught). These seem appropriate for the Program Coordinators also. After some more discussion, the following motion was made and passed:
Designation of Task Force Chairs and Program Coordinators as category I or II should be determined by the appropriate Associate Vice-President and Deans. Appropriate input should be solicited from Task Force Chairs or Program Coordinators to enable rational decision making. Criteria used in making this determination should be explicit and public.
6. Policy & Procedures Committee Report
The Senate has been asked to make suggestions for the Administrative Rule that deals with administrators being eligible for faculty status. At the March meeting the faculty passed a resolution that basically stated we are against such a policy. We revisited this proposed administrative rule at this meeting. After much discussion, we were not able to reach agreement on appropriate wording of a revision to this proposed rule. The committee will bring new wording to the June meeting for discussion.
Senators were also asked to look at a new Board Policy A4 Ends Policy. There was some discussion about grammatical issues, particularly as they relate to clarity. It was noted that often these policies are the result of multiple revisions over an extended time period. The general sentiment was that perhaps policies should receive an overall "wordsmithing" review prior to final approval. Regarding the current proposed policy, some minor revisions were suggested. The Senate also wholeheartedly endorses item 6., that "the college shall create a good place to work, to learn, and to otherwise experience the higher-education process." Mike Midgley will relay this information to the Board.
7. Salary and Benefits Committee Report
John Cise updated the Senate on meetings the Committee has had and where we are on salary issues. Austin has the highest cost of living, the highest home prices, and a booming economy. Yet faculty are paid well below the average salaries for comparable metropolitan community colleges. Houston Community College has dealt with this issue and now has a policy to keep their salaries equitable. It would take 6% for ACC faculty to reach average, or about $1.1 million. The College's Budget Priorities Review Committee has endorsed a minimum raise this year equal to at least the cost of living (approximately 3.4%).
8. Reorganization Issues
In regard to the fall schedule issues, there was a recommendation to refer it to the appropriate Senate committee for further discussion and recommendations. It was stated that Task Forces are the proper place for scheduling issues to be decided, not the Provost's Office. The following motion was made and passed:
The Full-Time Faculty Senate is concerned about the scheduling process for fall and its results. We will develop a more detailed discussion of our concerns over the next month or so. However, we want to immediately express our concerns about many of the classes scheduled for short sessions or for one-day-a-week. In a number of disciplines, courses have been scheduled in formats that the Task Forces believe to be educationally unsound for most students. Some disciplines have individual classes that are longer than students can effectively concentrate on learning additional new material. Others have too little time between class sessions for students to be able to finish the required amount of homework.
We ask that the schedules currently in development only include classes in formats approved by the appropriate Task Forces.
There was a discussion about the Upward Evaluation instrument that was just sent to all classroom teaching faculty. The instrument has many incorrect and inappropriate questions on it for the positions defined at ACC today. For instance, the people being evaluated are no longer supervisors of the people evaluating them. Only the last page asking what the person should start and stop doing is particularly useful. This form needs to be reviewed and changed, and the logical place would be the Faculty Evaluation Committee. Mike Midgley will bring the Senate's concerns about this document to the attention of appropriate administrators.
The Administrative Rule on Sabbatical Leave is being reviewed and revised by John Hastings. The Senate asked Mike to make sure this document comes to the Senate for review also.
The meeting was adjourned.
Cherry Luedtke was absent. David Lydic was a substitute for Joe Lostracco, Steve Ziser for Anne Keddy-Hector and Marita Peppard for Nan Walters
|
