Glendale Community College Faculty Senate
Meeting of August 23, 2007
Approved Minutes
(Please note: General interest issues or meeting and notifications are listed below in bold to allow them to be located more easily.)
I. General
A. Call to Order: A quorum being present, President Jim Daugherty called the meeting to order at 2:30 P.M. in the SU 104 B,C Conference Room. Senators present included Secretary Robert Reavis, Treasurer Alicia Ottenberg, Jose Aguiñaga, Ruth Callahan, Susan Campbell, Phil Fernandez, Fernando Garcia, Emily M. Gwinn, Susan High, Steve Kadel, Connie Labuhn, Johnnie C. May, Michele Parker, Laura Schuett, and Executive Councilor at Large Jim Reed.
B. Introduction of Guests- Including but not limited to: Lynn Brysacz, Hannes Kvaran, Pam Nelson, and Mary Jane Onnen.
Faculty Association President Reyes Medrano visited later in the meeting (see below).
The conspicuous absence of Lyle Walcott was noted by several senators. [He is actively retired on 49% time.]
C. The proposed meeting agenda was adopted as amended.
D. The minutes from the April 26th meeting, distributed via email, were unanimously approved.
E. Treasurer’s Report-
Jim Daugherty noted that one check was written; there was no other activity.
F. President’s Report-
President Daugherty informed Senate that the All Faculty Reception last Friday was a great success, with more than 10% of district faculty in attendance.
He also informed Senate that he had forwarded to GCC President Green our request for her to sign the President’s Climate Commitment. She indicated a favorable response, and interest in faculty ideas on implementation.
President Green has also received the College Plan, but has yet to sign it.
President Daugherty also attended last month’s Governing Board meeting where the Board had a preliminary approval of the yearly budget. The budget included a total of 3.5% increase for Faculty. They will still take the Meet and Confer counter into consideration. Final budget approval will take place at the June Governing Board meeting.
G. FEC Report-
No report was given at this time. Questions were held for FEC President Medrano.
H. Governing Board Report-
President Daugherty reported that the last Governing Board meeting was the shortest on record (approximately six minutes) with no reports from the community except for the Faculty Association.
II. Old Business
A. President Daugherty reported on the redesigned GCC website, which went live on August 1st. Most comments were positive. Additional changes are ongoing.
B. President Daugherty informed Senate on improvements to campus signage. The on-campus signage requested by Senate is not planned for this year. However, funds have been dedicated to replace or improve the large, old letter-board signs at the entrances to campus (e.g. 59th and Vogel).
Senator Reed noted that the new signs with small lettering (such as those regarding weapons and skateboarding regulations) did not improve the look of campus. Senator Kadel suggested we invite GCC Vice President Jeffery to the next Senate meeting for a discussion of signage.
At this time Senators expanded the conversation on signage to a broader discussion of campus image and traffic disruptions on 59th Avenue. Senator Reed reported on accidents occurring along 59th where construction has limited turns and constricted traffic. He also noted that students might take alternate routes along side streets, which may disrupt our neighbors. Others commented on congestion and student complaints. Senator Parker reported that a frustrated student had dropped her class. Pam Nelson notified her students that the lane closures were created by the city, not GCC. President Daugherty noted that parking on the grass was no longer a legal choice due to new regulations on particulates. Hannes Kvaran noted that Glendale citizens can contact the mayor. Senator Reavis bought a bicycle. J
C. President Daugherty noted an MOU to create a new formula for Online Remuneration. The old scale was originally developed by Senate years ago and has since been adapted. Importantly, a new scale needs to be determined and included in the RFP. Much discussion ensued with various problems of pay by ‘piece-meal’, unequal pay between online vs. face-to-face classes that varies with enrollment, problems of cancelled classes, etc.
Senator Reed stated that chairs need to support their faculty to ensure they are properly compensated and if teaching online have office hours online rather than on campus. In addition, faculty should be paid 3 load hours for course development, regardless of whether the course ‘goes’ that semester. He also expressed concern about simply shifting students from classrooms to online classes, rather than growing our enrollment. More discussion and examples ensued.
Senator Ottenberg noted that all faculty can verify their loading on their blue loading sheet at the start of each semester.
Senator Kadel presented a letter signed by eight faculty members and addressed to Senator Kadel and the Faculty Association. He read the letter into the minutes (see attachment).
President Daugherty tried to clarify the discussion along ‘two lines of thought’;
1. Fairness: online instruction and face-to-face instruction must both be fairly paid, and
2. Flexibility: online courses must be allowed to offer small sections, at some alternative loading
President Daugherty suggested the formation of a committee to quickly meet, confer and forward their suggestions to the ongoing MOU group set to make a final recommendation this fall. The committee was formed and chaired by Senator Kadel. Other committee members nominated were: Senator Ottenberg, Senator Parker, James Abraham, Sheryl Benavides, and Pam Nelson.
D. Senator Reed reported on the success of the Faculty-sponsored All-campus Bash, which was moved this year to the first Monday of accountability (August 13). He then moved,
"That
the faculty sponsored end of the year all-campus bash be moved from the Friday
before spring finals to the first day of accountability in the fall."
The
motion was seconded by Senator Kadel and passed unanimously.
III. New Business
A. Senator Reavis spoke against the new campus ‘requirement’ that ID badges must be worn at all times on campus and while acting as a representative of GCC. This new requirement, along with the numerous ethical ‘statements’ that district wants faculty to sign, create an atmosphere of reprisal, and thus counter our efforts to create a safe and supportive campus climate that promotes learning. Discussion ensued with concerns presented, including: the need to identify employees for campus safety (badges make us safer), concerns of being identified as an employee by disgruntled students (badges make us targets), adjunct ID’s include ‘Temporary’ which suggests lesser status, and the possible problem of the lanyard being used against the wearer, although it was noted they are ‘breakaway’ lanyards. This discussion ended upon the arrival of Senate’s invited guest.
(IB). Faculty Association President Medrano arrived at 3:45 PM. Senators and guests introduced themselves. President Medrano then asked for questions.
Senator Garcia asked if we should sign the new online forms. President Medrano responded no, we should not sign any of them for now: Conflict of Interest, Enrollment, Internal Control, etc. These new forms are disturbing, nebulous and open to interpretation. If you sign, it is unclear as to what you might be accountable. One problem is the forms identify chairs as management. They are not managers. Chairs are faculty. Other documents already set the ethical standards. Faculty Association President Elect Vaughan has suggested that a single form replace the existing series. Current discussions with Chancellor Glasper are positive. The administration has accepted most of faculty’s concerns. A resolution is expected soon.
Senator Callahan asked if our newly hired PR firm will be make its initial act a response to the reporting by the East Valley Tribune. President Medrano responded that one reporter has repeatedly made errors of fact in several quotes, and legal action is being pursued. A letter has already been sent to the editor. The reporter’s errors are consistently biased and typically end on a negative note and reference Chancellor Glasper. Other senators speculated on possible motivations.
RM suggested to the Board a common retreat to discuss differences and noted the Board may have acted illegally in its attempt to implement policy i.e. the new online forms as implementation of the Blue Panel recommendations.
President Medrano reported on the great success of the All Faculty Meeting of Friday, August 17 at the Crowne Plaza. Nearly 300 faculty attended. It was a great opportunity to add members, raise money for the PAC and because it was not held on a campus, faculty were free to speak openly. He hoped it would become an annual event.
President Medrano was asked if we should each respond to errors in the press by writing ourselves to the editor, blogs, reporters, etc. He suggested it was better to respond in a single voice and he was working with the PR firm.
President Daugherty informed President Medrano of the need to change Online loading formulas and the committee just created earlier in this meeting. RM said the faculty team is ready to meet, but the administration is not. He will inform the district committee about the new committee at GCC.
President Medrano was told of the new ID badges and policy at GCC. He stated that because the policy is not from district, faculty cannot be required to comply.
At 4:13 RM had to leave to be on time for a 5:00 PM district meeting. Senate applauded President Medrano.
B. President Daugherty informed Senate of the resignation of Vice President Van Marche and that Senator Kelly had transferred to another campus. He asked for volunteers to serve on a Nominating Committee. Senators Gwinn and Schuett volunteered. David Jenkins, Pam Joraanstad and David Rodriguez were suggested as non-senate committee members. They will be contacted and requested to serve.
C. President Daugherty noted an existing problem in our constitution, Article 4, Section 5. We must define the exact method used to count votes in preferential balloting. Senators Callahan and Ottenberg volunteered to serve on a Constitution Committee. Joy Wingersky will be asked to serve as well.
Senator Ottenberg noted that the ballot for Vice President and Senator can also include an amendment for the constitution.
At this point the ID badge discussion was briefly rejoined. It was reported that some new faculty are concerned for their job safety with all the emphasis on signing statements and the requirement to wear ID badges. President Daugherty noted as a point of fact, that since the new ID badge is only a GCC ‘requirement’, it is not enforceable. He will also bring up the concerns of new faculty with President Green.
IV. Information/Announcements
A. Senator Kadel noted we need to enroll new members to the Faculty Association. Senator Ottenberg will e-mail faculty. Senator Callahan asked about the recently created list , ‘Ten Good Reasons’ to become a member of the Faculty Association. Senator Reed stated that President Medrano has the list.
V. The meeting was adjourned at 4:28 PM.
VI. Next meeting will be Thursday, September 27, 2007 at 2:30 pm in HTI-124.
Physical Sciences Department
Glendale Community College
6000 W. Olive Avenue
Glendale AZ 85302
Date:
To: Senator Steve Kadel and the
Faculty Association.
From: The undersigned Physical Sciences
Department Faculty
Subject: On-line course loading
We,
the undersigned, question the fairness of the loading for on-line courses in
comparison to face-to-face “traditional” courses based on the following three
grounds as originally written by Gary Calderone.
The
first is mathematical:
By the
preliminary calculations presented to us at our department meeting, seven
students beneath an initial count of 24 (18-24) warrant
no increase of load, whereas students 11-17 and 25-31 apparently require .2333
and .5722 increases in workload respectively.
There is a similar situation for students 42-48. This is analogous to the old joke about
restaurant menus: One egg = $1, Two eggs
= $1.50. I'll take the 50 cent egg,
thanks. J What mathematical
rationale is there for this discrepancy? If additional students require
additional work, and I would generally agree that this is the case most of the
time, then why not graduate the scale without the changes in slope? The scale shown implies that an on-line
instructor with 25 students is doing 33% more work than an on-line instructor
with 24 students. Do you have
justification for such a claim? I can
tell you empirically that a “traditional” class with 48 students is much more work than a class with 24 students. Simply consider grading exams- it takes me
twice as long to grade 48 exams as it does to grade 24. Why, then is loading for “traditional” classes
not similarly graduated?
The
second concern is the justification for the discrepancy between on-line and
traditional courses. A faculty member
teaching a “traditional” class of 48 students is paid for a single load. The same faculty is not even paid 1.5 times
until the section has 65 students. It takes 90 students to get a double
load. Is there justification for the
apparent difference in perceived workloads?
Is there a peer-reviewed study on the actual workloads associated with
on-line versus traditional courses that can be cited as evidence for this
loading discrepancy? The current loading
schedule essentially states that an on-line instructor with 30 students is
doing as much work as a faculty teaching a “traditional” course would be doing
with 65. This seems inherently false.
Finally,
the timing of when students are counted toward loading is of great
concern. Even using the 45-day rosters
presents a problem with respect to continuing enrollment in the course. I [Gary Calderone] have data from all the
district's geology programs on attrition rates for the last 10 years. Rio's on-line course has a fairly high
attrition rate compared to those colleges offering traditional courses. If I am to offer on-line courses at GCC and
my initial load is set up with the first-day-of-class count, then if 50% drop
by day 45, I could end up not meeting my academic load. To avoid this loss of income, some
instructors might resort to less than admirable practices including: holding withdrawals
of student who stop participating, offering a
sub-standard course to avoid attrition, or worse. I don't see how you can avoid doing the
final and only count at drop/add week.
Or better still, why don't we simply load on-line courses the way we
load their traditional counterparts and avoid the problem entirely? Another option to compensate or change the
on-line loading would be to cap the enrollments or open other sections if the
number of on line students in a single section is perceived as excessive,
rather than overloading a single section in this way.
Gary Calderone Cheryl Dellai
Pamela Nelson Karrie Wood
John Winters Mary Harris
David Raffaelle Sara Watt