Minutes April 30, 2012

DRAFT

Bristol Community College

Faculty & Professional Staff Senate Meeting

Minutes of Monday April 30, 2012

H129 3:15 p.m.

Senators in attendance: Tom Grady, Jeanne Grandchamp, Greg Sethares, James Pelletier (had to leave early for class in NB), Susan McCourt, Ron Weisberger, Debra St. George, Howard Tinberg, Sharon Pero, Martha Williams, Anthony Ucci, Jim Constantine, Sil Ferreira, Marlene Pollock, David Warr, Cecil Leonard, Sally Gabb, Gabriella  Adler

Excused Absences:  Nan Loggains, Paul Robillard

Absences:  T. McGarty, S. Adams, J. Rose

Guests: Alan Rolf, Sandy Lygren, Jean Myles, Betsy Kemper-French, Jim Corven

The meeting was called to order by President Sethares at 3:15 p.m.

MINUTES: Minutes from April 2, 2012 were reviewed and approved unanimously.

Grandchamp Speaker Series: Senator Jim Pelletier presented Professor James Corven with a certificate in thanks for his April 4, 2012 presentation for the Senate’s Speaker Series, “Sustainability: Let’s Talk About the Good News!” Professor Corven’s was the second of the Series’ presentations.

Nominations, Elections and By-Laws Committee: NEB-L Chair Susan McCourt reported on the recent election. 1) Number of Senators has increased from 23 to 28; 2) Div. IV encountered problems re: determining the number of Senators appropriate to their division due to team teaching etc. A motion was made, accepted and approved to offer the division’s write-in candidate a Senate position if investigation warrants an additional Senate position be awarded.

Governance, Academic Decision-Making & Transparency: Discussion was held regarding a potential Governance & Transparency initiative #2—separate from the first initiative to establish a clear, inclusive, closed-loop process for academic decision-making: what governance issues/priorities will the Senate and Administration be working on in Fall 2012? The President’s Council’s choices and the Senate’s choices, both sets culled from the “Best Practices” notes (from the May 11 and Nov. 30, 2011 Governance & Transparency Roundtables), were examined as were the results of the survey of the faculty and staff made by the Senate President. An additional document drafted by Senate President Greg Sethares showed where the Senate’s, the constituents’ and the President’s Council’s governance & transparency priorities overlapped, and there was considerable discussion about which 3-5 governance & transparency priorities the Senate should recommend be pursued. There was also discussion of sticking to pursuit of measurable goals rather than general principles. President Sethares suggested meeting with members of the Senate sub-committee who are working with administration to develop a proposed closed-loop process for academic decision making (Sharon Pero, Anthony Ucci, Debra St. George) before committing to pursuit of additional governance & transparency priorities. (Will the adoption of a closed-loop academic decision-making process obviate the need to pursue other priorities identified in 2011 by including those priorities as part of the closed-loop process?)

Governance, Academic Decision-Making & Transparency (Initiative #1, the closed-loop process): The Senate’s team reported on the first two meetings, that had been hard to come by at the hectic semester-end. Team members Sharon Pero, Anthony Ucci and Debra St. George indicated that at the group’s first meeting, progress was made in roughing-out a process that would include 1) initiation of an academic project that might come from administration, faculty or staff; 2) early identification of stakeholders; 3) the need to communicate the decision, once it is made; 4) the need to evaluate the process at each step in the process; 5) consideration of how the college’s committee structure works in the closed-loop process. At the end of the first meeting, administration representatives seemed pleased with what was being roughed out. The second meeting occurred today (April 30). At this meeting, administration reps raised concerns about management rights and union rights and suggested that problems might arise if, after recommendations have been made by stakeholders following a closed-loop deliberation, administration decides to make a major decision with which stakeholders do not approve. It was agreed by both teams that more early involvement of those who are to do a proposed project or who will be affected by a proposed project is valuable. It was also agreed that the college’s CAO has the ultimate decision-making power in things academic. In short, during this second meeting, administration reps and Senate reps began to set boundaries.

President Greg Sethares observed that Senate and administration share agreement regarding many governance beliefs and practices and said that he felt “we are in a good spot” in our development of a closed-loop process for academic decision-making. This process will be developed, he added, but “it will be important that all stakeholders—administration, Senate and constituents—have input and are on board.”

The meeting was adjourned at 4:35 p.m.

Respectfully submitted, J. Grandchamp, Secretary, Faculty & Professional Staff Senate