Minutes May 6, 2013

Bristol Community College

Faculty & Professional Staff Senate Meeting

Minutes of Monday May 6, 2013

H129 3:15 p.m.

Senators in attendance: Betsy Kemper French, Tom Grady, Jeanne Grandchamp, Ravitha Amarasingham (for Sandy Lygren, Martha Williams, Marlene, Pollock, Alan Rolfe, Sil Ferreira, Cecil Leonard, Deb St. George, Sharon Pero, Joy Rose, James Pelletier, Susan McCourt, Jim Corven, Kelemu Woldegiorgis, James Constantine, Sally Gabb, Jean Myles, Gaby Adler.

Excused Absences: Howard Tinberg, JP Nadeau, Nan Loggains, Ron Weisberger

Absences: Paul Robillard, Thomas McGarty, David Warr

Guests: 6

Meeting called to order 3:15

MINUTES: Minutes from April 1, 2013 were reviewed and approved unanimously.

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

Informational Items:

1. Senator Jeanne Grandchamp will send on to all Senators the report of the Senate subcommittee that reviewed the updates made to the college’s Search Committee Guide. She will also send a copy of the document itself and request a discussion via email and a vote on what, if anything, should be forwarded on behalf of the Senate to Vice President Tafa Awolaju.
2. Governance, Academic Decision-Making & Transparency: the committee did not meet much; once in December and once in April. Last week, however, there was a very productive meeting. Senator Sharon Pero reported, sharing a model developed by the committee, and indicating that a policy will be addressed, too. (Senator Pero shared a two-page summary of the work done.) The process/policy will be designed to use the existing committee system to its fullest advantage and be inclusive, as well. A format for communication, a way to connect all stakeholders to each other and to proposed academic initiatives, was holding up the subcommittee, and now they have a process and will work on how to physically get stakeholders in to see and comment on proposed academic initiatives. The closed loop nature of the process will help insure we aren't working by pilot indefinitely; there will be evaluation done of pilot initiatives, and all initiatives. The Senate will need to encourage folks identified as stakeholders for individual academic initiatives to contribute. The proposed process recognizes management rights and asks that final decisions be published with their rationales.  Discussion ensued. So far, the developing process/policy has not addressed proposals that administration might feel may need to be "fast tracked.” Apparently, the subcommittee found itself bogged down on “process”: do we do Web CT?...a “dashboard”? Etc.  A number of questions arose: 1. Who will decide this item or that is or is not an academic issue? (The process needs to be ironed out...we might miss things that are academic at first; the college President might not think something is an academic issue and the senate might. There was a suggestion from floor that a definition of what is likely to constitute an “academic” decision could be developed. The subcommittee has indicated (in the two-page summary provided by Senator Pero) that the onus is on person initiating the academic initiative to identify the ways in which it qualifies as “academic.” Further suggestion was made that anything that impacts instruction is surely “academic.”

President McCourt asked for further areas of concern related to academic decision making and the potential process/policy. Senator Marlene Pollock suggested the Senate might help faculty to share information regarding how they teach diversity; she added that the college also needs a way to double people of color on faculty and staff. Discussion followed as to whether or not this fit the paradigm of the proposed Academic Decision-Making Policy & Process. It was also observed that task forces having Senate and administration members have been effective and it was suggested that we continue that. One senator wondered aloud if the design of the new building will be academically-friendly. Is this part of “academic” decision making and should the senate/its constituents be involved? A second senator offered that we routinely ask of initiatives “Is this the Senate’s preview?” The issue of students not doing their exit interviews for FAFSA being denied access to on-campus printing was raised. Students in this predicament are late with papers. Is there a better way to insure they do the exit interviews? This issue was addressed immediately by a Senate guest: “students ARE notified to do the exit interview and will need to take responsibility if they do not do so.” It was indicated that this might mean they temporarily forfeit their rights to copy. One senator pointed out that Senator Pero’s summary chart includes things discussed at Central Committee; we do not wish to duplicate the system, rather comment on and evaluate the system. There was a suggestion for a task force on system-wide BCC assessment, assessment being an on-going concern of the college.

Senate Elections: Online Senate elections will “go live” this week, and guests to

         today’s meeting who are running for Senate were mentioned.

Summer Planning:  July 17 is the date for the Senate summer retreat. Among the topics will be review of the outdated Senate By-Laws. Some Senates at other colleges discuss and sign off on curriculum changes; is this something our Senate would like to consider, that we be in the lineup AFTER the curriculum committee? There was a plea from floor for the Senate to remain independent from college committees.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:18 p.m.

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