Ventura College Academic Senate
Minutes
Thursday, 19 January 2012     MCW-312

I.	Call to Order
This meeting was called to order 1:36. The following senate members were present:
Algiers, Kammy—Math and Sciences
Arquilevich, Gabe—English and Learning Resources
Beynon, Sharon—English and Learning Resources
Chen, Albert—Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities
Gardner, Ty—Math and Sciences
Guillen, Guadalupe—Student Services
Haines, Robbie—Senate Secretary
Lange, Cari—Senate Vice President
Mitchell, Nancy – Career & Technical Education
Morris, Terry—PE/Athletics, Communication Studies, Foreign Languages and ESL
Muñoz, Paula—Student Services
Pauley, Mark—Senate Treasurer
Sezzi, Peter—Senate President
The following guests were present:
Arevalo, Gloria—Articulation Officer
Tovar, Antonio—Vice President, ASVC

II.	Public Comments
No public comments were made. 

III.	Acknowledgement of Guests
No guests were acknowledged.

IV.	Approval of minutes
Muñoz moved to approve minutes from 1 Decempber 2011 meeting, Pauley seconded, motion carried 13–0–1 with Morris abstaining. 

V.	Study Sessions
a.	Program Review Data of Student Performance
Sezzi passed out two graphs originating from VC’s Fall 2011 Program Review: a college-wide grade distribution graph, and a graph showing grading data for two anonymous instructors who teach the same course. Both graphs showed that grade distribution at VC does not follow a normal distribution peaking at “C”s, but rather that a disproportionate number of “A”s and “B”s are awarded. The college-wide trend over the past three years indicated that an “A” was the most frequent grade given at the college.  A discussion of grading rigor, grade distribution, and general community college grading reputation ensued. It was opined that our job is to pull students along, and that this contributes to more “A”s. Part-timers may be under some pressure to be popular with students so they get their next assignment. It was further noted that it is probably unfair to compare courses in hard sciences to more general, GE-type courses. When it was asked what the Senate’s role should be in this topic, general agreement was reached that our role is to promote conversations about this topic when and where they need to happen (i.e., at the department level). Several senators noted that such discussions do not have to be contentious if the people discussing the matter are interested in personal growth. The impact of the topic on SLOs, and vice versa, was also discussed. Sezzi noted that a Course Outline of Record (COR) can be tool for keeping instruction consistent, and he suggested that faculty be reminded to review their CORs regularly. It was suggested that conversations on this topic could be encouraged through professional development and campus forum events.

b.	Desired Qualities/Aptitudes in Successor Chancellor
Sezzi read names of potential community and campus members of a Chancellor-focused search committee, and he noted that there will be 21 people on this committee. The hiring process was discussed. Accreditation standards require us to have to have a “chief executive officer.” Sezzi solicited suggestions from senators for what qualities would be desirable. When asked if hiring criteria will be based on traits we want in our District, Sezzi responded that this will be determined at the first search committee meeting. Qualities were proposed by senators, recorded by Sezzi.

VI.	President’s Report
a.	Board of Trustee meetings report
Sezzi reported that program discontinuance is finally done. At VC, the Architecture degree and certificate and real estate proficiency award and inventory of courses were formally disconintued by Board action last Tuesday. Sezzi’s request spoke against these actions.  OC’s Television program was not discontinued and given one year to come around. Many other programs (e.g., Sign Language at VC, Music at OC, Administration of Justice at MC) were removed their college’s respective proposed discontinuance lists prior to this Board meeting. In the end, one faculty member from Moorpark was fired. Senators opined that faculty who were given a reprieve were those who gathered and presented data on the value of their programs, and because of community activism in support of those programs. 

b.	Consultation Council Report
Sezzi stated that there was nothing to report. Meznek appeared to be delaying discussion of the Participatory Governance Manual. 

c.	DCHR, DCSL, DTRW and DCAS Reports
DCHR: Sezzi stated that there was nothing to report; its next meeting had been cancelled. DCSL: When final versions of various topics are ready, Sezzi will bring them to Senate. Early registration and CalWorks students’ position in it was discussed; it was noted that changes to this must be approved by the Board, which will look at that in its February Board Policy subcommittee meeting. DTRW: Sezzi was unable to attend; Pauley did though and he stated that there was nothing to report, only minor issues had been discussed. Sezzi did note that by the end of this year, VC will have more TMC on the books than the other district campuses. Eight have been proposed. The matter of Pass/No Pass grading in classes that count toward majors was discussed. DCAS: Sezzi will have more information to share at the next Senate meeting with regards to District reserves spending, budget carryover, etc.

d.	BGOITF Report
Pauley reported that while BGOITF was being pushed to take action on Board goals, the last meeting which was in early December was less urgent and inconsequential. A draft report from Gaither Loewenstein about how to improve curriculum had come out of blue this morning. Sezzi read parts of it to Senate. Pauley noted that Loewenstein is still continually and sometimes insidiously pushing for a District Curriculum Committee—it appears to be a major agenda item for him. A future Senate Study Session may be devoted to Lowenstein’s report about the curricular processes within our District.

VII.	Senate Subcommittee and Campus Committee Reports
a.	Curriculum Committee Report
Pauley informed senators that there will now be 5 different curriculum deadlines, staggered among Divisions in order to relieve the current bottlenecking that exists at the start of each Fall semester when all curriculum revisions is currently due. Dates of those deadlines will be announced to all users soon. 

a.	Budget and Resource Council Report
Pauley mentioned that Keebler mentioned at BRC the concept of an extension college as stipulated in AB 515. It would mean that fees from students beyond apportionment could be managed by us locally rather than by the state. Interactions with BOG waivers/Ventura Promise/etc., would need to be worked out. Sezzi noted, however, that the concept will probably never be realized at VC because he thought that the legislation permits only Santa Monica City College and College of the Canyons to do this.  If this would be a concept to be pursued at our college and District, it would require Senate and Board approval. 

VIII.	Information Items
No other information items were discussed.

IX.	Adjournment
This meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m.