Minutes April 2,2012

Bristol Community College

Faculty & Professional Staff Senate Meeting

Minutes of Monday April 2, 2012

H210 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, Nan Loggains, Marlene Pollock, David Warr

Excused Absences: C. Leonard, J. Rose, G. Adler

Absences: T. McGarty, S. Adams, P. Robillard, S. Gabb

Guests: D. Lawton & D. Feeney (for the Joint Senate/Administration Advisement Committee), M. Men, T. Goltermann, A. Ibara, E. Shea, W. Kelly, B. Bauman, C. Adamowicz, M. Kelly, S. Kocur, P. Wentworth, Erik Bauman, S. Boissoneault, D. Yohe

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

MINUTES: Minutes from February 27, 2012 were reviewed and approved unanimously.

Governance, Academic Decision-Making & Transparency: Senate President Greg Sethares offered an overview of what have become the two joint Senate/Administration initiatives regarding decision-making and transparency. Project #1, to establish a clear, inclusive, closed-loop process for academic decision-making, was described and discussed first. For this process, Sharon Pero, Steve Ozug, Anthony Ucci, Sarah Garrett, Deb St. George and David Feeney have been asked to form a committee, working under a timeline. Four weeks from today, April 30, is the date set for their initial recommendations re: a decision-making process; by May 7, final recommendations are expected; by May 14, the college president will report to the college community on an action plan for implementation of project recommendations. Project #2 will be undertaken to draft a list of agreed-upon best practices in decision making (culled from the May 11 and November 30 joint discussions last year) with the top three of these agreed-upon best practices becoming the plan for next year’s Senate/Administration work. The President’s Council has considered and has forwarded its top five best practices. An online survey of constituents will be undertaken to determine constituents’ top concerns; Senate feedback will also be considered. President Council’s, Senate’s and constituents’ feedback will be considered together to determine the top three agreed-upon best practices to be worked upon.

Nominations, Elections and By-Laws Announcement: NEB-L Chair Susan McCourt reminded Senators of their need to self-nominate if they are eligible for the upcoming Senate election and hope to serve another term.

Joint Senate/Administration Advisement Committee Update: Professor Deborah Lawton and Administration’s representative David Feeney, co-chairs of the special Advisement Committee, presented an update of the committee’s work. Among the anticipated recommendations: 1) implementing a variety of methods to offer students advisement (e.g. having face-to-face and online advisement, (potentially) allowing full time faculty to work in an advisement center, having more group advisement for programs, etc.); 2) making better use of available technology (e.g. requiring the use of Degreeworks within three years, developing a remotely accessible system for students to sign up for advisement appointments, etc.); 3) beginning to emphasize advisement throughout the academic year (e.g. instituting a permanent advisement center, orienting students to Degreeworks, creating a template for program coordinators—a document for programs to help students prepare for advisement; 4) collecting data to assess the Advisement Program consistently to determine what about advisement is working and what needs improvement. Discussion was held, during which Dave Feeney and Deb Lawton noted they were taking suggestions from today’s discussion back to the committee, which will be meeting in April. Following this April meeting, they hoped to bring the full recommendations to a wider BCC audience. Before the closing of the discussion, those attending were reminded that advisor training is in the process of being posted in modules online and that Trish Goltermann and Makna Men are available to answer advisor questions during the upcoming advisement period.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:10 p.m.

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

Minutes January 30, 2012

Bristol Community College

Faculty & Professional Staff Senate Meeting

Minutes of Monday January 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, Gaby Adler, Anthony Ucci, Jim Constantine, Sil Ferreira, Cecil Leonard, Sally Gabb, Nan Loggains, Marlene Pollock, David Warr

Excused Absences: S. Adams, P. Robillard

Absences: T. McGarty, J. Rose

The meeting was called to order by President Sethares at 3:20 p.m.

MINUTES: Minutes from December 5, 2011were reviewed and approved unanimously; minutes from January 23 were reviewed, amended for date and location in header and approved unanimously.

Governance, Academic Decision-Making & Transparency: Data from the May 11 and Nov 30, 2011 joint Senate-Administration events on governance were briefly reviewed, and discussion began regarding moving toward formal policy changes. It was noted that based on the data from May 11, 2011 and November 30, 2011, there are agreed-upon protocols for decision-making that can now be put together in a draft.

The first part of the discussion centered on a process by which potential new academic initiatives might be raised or presented for discussion by faculty and staff. Would the Professional Staff meeting be a good venue for such discussions? It was noted that discussion, with votes on the issues being discussed (perhaps using technology, like clickers), could be held. Right now, there is only a sense of what the body wants at discussions of new initiatives, not actual votes on initiatives and their elements. Also discussed was the idea that a vote could be taken at Division meetings during Senate discussions on academic issues, so that Senate constituents can more clearly inform their Senators of their wishes.

Next, Senate discussion moved to a possible process by which new information on potential academic initiatives might be shared with faculty and staff or stakeholders. An online site could be established and the following process followed: 1) at the online site, the proposal and a current assessment-and-recommendation for that proposal could be published; 2) stakeholders could be invited to log on, discuss and weigh in on the proposal and its recommendation; 3) the proposal could then be revised; and 4) the revised proposal could then get voted on, online, by stakeholders. Even if the vote is not accepted as binding, faculty and staff stakeholders would be giving input and showing whether they are offering clear, real support for a proposed initiative. The process would be open and transparent.

Following this, discussion moved to how stakeholders should be identified and who should do so. The idea of a Governance Committee was floated. It could be staffed by an equal number of administrators and senators, and perhaps others. This committee would look at whether decision-making is including all of the appropriate stakeholders and could provide a year-end report about whether or not decision-making protocols are being used effectively.

It was noted by several present that the model for a process for governance and transparency is the Joint Administration-Senate Advisement Committee and the processes attendant to it. The Joint Committee’s report is anticipated, and when it is issued, senators, constituents and administrators can discuss the recommendations during a meeting (professional staff?), with faculty and staff perhaps weighing in on the recommendations using clickers or other technology. Following that would be a vote in the Senate based on constituents’ feedback, with Administration officially weighing in with their points of view on the findings, as well.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m.

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

Update 3-28-12

Hello Senate Constituents, and BCC Academic Community,

I am sending this update to a larger audience than usual, because it references a topic with implications for the entire academic community. 

Joint Advisement Project

For a little over a year, the Joint Senate/Administration Task Force on Advisement has been studying ways to improve BCC’s advisement system.  The charge and process statement is attached.  Step #5 in the “Process” section states, “Prior to finalizing its report, the committee will report out to the college community, giving the opportunity for feedback and revision prior to implementation.”

Task Force co-chairs Deb Lawton and Dave Feeney will be attending the Senate meeting on Monday, April 2, 3:15pm to have this report-out and offer the opportunity for feedback.  The first 10 minutes or so of the meeting will include some brief Senate business, but the remainder of the meeting will be devoted to the advisement project.  All community members are invited to attend and participate.  I hope to see you there!

Monday, April 2, 3:15pm; H-210

Greg

Greg Sethares

President, Faculty and Professional Staff Senate

http://www.senatebcc.blogspot.com/

Update 2-28-12

I am sending this Senate update to a slightly larger audience than usual, because it references a topic with implications for the entire academic community.  Below is an update and some basic information that will hopefully help us start to understand some of the issues, terminology, and how the topic will impact the college and our students.    

The Common Core State Standards are new academic standards for P-12 English Language Arts and Mathematics, adopted in 48 states, including Massachusetts.  The Common Core includes both curricular and instructional standards intended to improve P-12 education nationwide.  Information can be found at www.corestandards.org

PARCC, The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers, is one of two national assessment consortia which are developing assessments to assess the Common Core.  Massachusetts has signed on to use the PARCC assessment starting in 2014-15.  Information can be found at www.parcconline.org

College Readiness:  In addition to PARCC assessing the Common Core, the plan is also to have the end of year 11^th grade assessment be used to determine if a high school student is “College Ready” in English and Mathematics, and not in need of developmental coursework in those areas.   

Senate Discussion:  At the January 23 Senate meeting, the Common Core State Standards and the PARCC assessment were discussed. 

·        Defining what it means to be “college ready” is a faculty concern.  Faculty need to be involved, and therefore it is an appropriate academic issue for the Senate to consider. 

·        Currently, MCAS and Accuplacer results show very little correlation.  Writing solid curriculum is important, but what about instructional pedagogy will change to assure positive change?

·        If the 11^th grade PARCC assessment will be used to determine if a student needs developmental coursework, then college faculty must be involved in determining how it is used.

·        It has been shown that students who need developmental coursework are less likely to complete a college degree than those who do not.  The question was raised whether there may be an unstated desire is to ultimately remove developmental education from higher education.

·        There was discussion of a Department of Higher Education plan to determine a Massachusetts definition of college readiness.

·        The topic of developmental reading instruction and how it relates to college readiness was also discussed.

Since that meeting,

• BCC has been awarded a $7500 grant to fund regional conversations among BCC, NB and FR P-12 educators about issues related to college readiness.  BCC’s English and Math Chairs are coordinating this and related efforts.
• In addition to the Senate discussion, the topic of what it means to be college ready in English and Math is being brought to those departments.  Later in the semester, the plan is to have a campus wide meeting (likely one of the scheduled all-academic area, all college, or professional staff meetings).
• The plan is for all of these related efforts to lead to the development of a BCC regional definition of college readiness before the end of May.  The Department of Higher Education has requested such a definition from each public higher education institution by June 1.  The plan is then to use these regional definitions to create a Massachusetts definition which will help the state determine appropriate use of the PARCC assessment as a tool for determining college readiness.

Senate Update 2-21-12

Academic Decision-Making: 

In 2011, the Senate and College Administration co-sponsored and co-facilitated two structured activities/meetings on the topic of academic decision-making.  On May 11, 43 members of the faculty, professional staff, and administration participated, and on November 30, there were 59 participants.  The structured activity consisted of quiet reading, thinking, and writing time, as well as time for each participant to share their thoughts with others sitting at their table. 

Topics included:

·         Exploring the essential roles of faculty, professional staff, and administration in academic decision-making.

·         Exploring challenges to shared governance, and balancing participation with accountability.

·         Exploring hypothetical scenarios to help discover a variety of issues involved in such decisions.

Results:

Through activities at each of the two events, participants ultimately defined a basis of commonly held characteristics that exemplify good academic decision-making, and made many concrete suggestions for how we could make improvements at BCC. 

Spring 2012 Senate Focus:

From the data collected at these two meetings, we hope to generate a list of jointly agreed to “Best Practices” in Academic Decision-Making.  This list, and the data collected at the meetings will help inform Senate efforts throughout the semester.  Our immediate goal this Spring is to use the data collected in 2011 to have a positive and real impact on shared governance at the college.

Senate Meetings:

• Reminder:  All constituents are invited to attend all Senate meetings.
• Next Senate meeting:  Monday, February 27^th, 3:15pm; H-129

      Agenda items (tentative): 

·         Best Practices in Governance draft

·         Governance: Discussion of results from November 30 and May 11 Joint Senate/Administration sponsored events, and Next Steps

·         Joint Senate/Administration Advising Group – update

·         Committee reports

Senate Update 12-05-11

An update of recent Senate Efforts:

JOINT GOVERNANCE EVENT

• On Wednesday, Nov 30, 2011, the BCC Faculty and Professional Staff Senate and College Administration co-sponsored and co-facilitated a structured activity/meeting on the topic of governance and academic decision-making.  This event was a follow-up to a similar activity that was held on May 11, 2011. 
• 59 people participated in the event, 34 members of college administration and 25 Senate Constituents.     
• Results of both the November 30 and May 11 sessions will inform Senate efforts on the topic of college governance and academic decision-making.  You will hear more in future updates.

SENATE MEETINGS:

• Reminder:  All constituents (this means you!) are invited to attend all Senate meetings.
• Next Senate meeting:  Today, Monday, December 5^th, 3:15pm; H-129

      Agenda items: 

·        Hiring Protocols/Search Committee Task Force

·        Joint Senate/Administration Advising Group

·        Governance: Discussion of results from November 30 and May 11 Joint Senate/Administration sponsored events, and Next Steps

Greg

Greg Sethares

President, Faculty and Professional Staff Senate

http://www.senatebcc.blogspot.com/