Tri-County
Technical College
Faculty Senate
Minutes
Date:
20 November 2013
Location: Fulp 400
Time:
4:00 p.m.
Members Present: Todd
Crisp-Simons, Stacey Frank, Bobby Watt, Kevin Bell, Cheryln Brown, Jeff
Christmas, Ron Brown, Mary Geren, Kate Williams, Tom Lawrence, Chris McFarlin,
and Tracy Kilgore
Members Absent: Marla Roberson, Carol Henry, Doug Allen,
and Stan Compton
Others Present: Lou Ann Martin, Linda Driggers, and Dana
Griffith
Presider: Todd Crisp-Simons
Approval of Minutes: It was motioned that the October 2013 minutes
be approved. The motion was seconded.
The minutes were approved unanimously.
New Business:
1. Issue discussed and major points of
discussion:
Return
to Title IV
Linda
Driggers was present to provide an explanation of what Title IV is and an
update of what is currently takes place, involving the rules of SAP and
compliance with the Department of Education. The recent attendance changes
result from the college’s need to be in compliance with the Department of
Education. Therefore, it was deemed necessary to assign responsibility to the
instructors ensuring attendance be taken and recorded immediately, providing
accurate documentation to the registrar’s office of those students in violation
of the attendance policy. This process would alert all involved as early as
possible so that balances could be adjusted within the business office and
financial aid. This would provide ample time for letters to be sent and afford students
time to resolve their balance prior to the next semester start. The financial
aid office and the Return to Title IV (R2T4) is looking to have a faculty
presence involved while they review the language of the current documents that
would ensure the lingo is understandable to our students. Ron Brown volunteered
for this position.
Action to be taken as a result of
discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:
None.
2. Issue discussed and major points of
discussion:
Introduction
of Starfish and Early Alert
Lou
Ann Martin presented information on the new Early Alert System called Starfish
that will be piloted in Spring 2014. Currently, this will only be piloted at
this time in specific courses with high unsuccessful rates, as well as courses
within comprehensive studies. This program is intends to provide faculty and
advisors an effective and easy way to connect the student to resources.
Additionally, it is put on the student to take action to resolve a problem
within their academic career. It will be the responsibility of the student
success coach to reach out to the student primarily. The course load will be
expanded in Fall 2014; however, to what extent is still not known. Lou Ann also
explained that the system will provide evidence for the types of resources our
students need and reaction rate for the students.
Action to be taken as a result of
discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:
None.
3. Issue discussed and major points of
discussion:
Adjunct/
Lecturer Concerns
Stacey
provided adjunct/ lecturer constituent concerns. The first constituent concern
addressed the limitation on adjunct hours. Adjuncts question whether this is a
permanent change or if with the implementation of the Affordable Care Act being
delayed, will they be able to get some of their classes back. Many worry they will
be forced to find other means of employment. The next concern was focused on
the lecturer positions that were created prior to the fall start. Many
lecturers have not seen a new classification of their title and they have heard
nothing regarding when their benefits will begin. Many are questioning the
transparency of the college on this and wondering why there is not a new
contract and job description. A third concern questions the amenities for
instructors that teach in the evening. The adjunct offices are locked by the
cleaning staff, as are classrooms, there is nothing to eat, and the campus is
not conducive of classes running until 10PM for faculty and students alike.
Lastly, the concern is focused on adjunct development opportunities.
Professional development and new-hire adjunct training is lacking and
problematic.
Kevin
provided additional adjunct constituent concerns which include all of the above
with one additional concern which is parking. Students are parking in the
faculty lots and there is no enforcement. This is especially problematic for
faculty who are arriving at campus at various and odd hours. Towing cars would
surely create a vast revenue source for the college, as well as help faculty
with parking. The Mechanic Street lot could be used for towed vehicles.
Todd
will take these concerns forward, and this matter will be revisited at a future
meeting.
Action to be taken as a result of
discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:
None.
4. Issue discussed and major points of
discussion:
Faculty
job descriptions, opportunities, and advancements
Jeff
presented constituent concerns that included the idea of department heads
having rotating positions and term limitations. Many ideas within the different
departments and divisions were discussed. Department head and CIA/ Program
Coordinator positions are annually renewed. Should rotation come to fruition,
it would be necessary to do so on a staggered implementation schedule so that
the necessary training and transitional period are facilitated. There would
also need to be term limitations. We should solicit feedback from faculty via
survey
Tom
presented constituent concerns that there are no advancement possibilities as a
faculty member. The idea offered included an academic ranking system that would
serve to identify longevity and seniority, while maintaining the state job
classification of instructor. Greenville Tech uses these descriptions. Chris
tried to get a hold of someone to clarify the incentives of a system such as
this, with no answer. Tom did not find anything within the state policies and
procedures regarding incentives. Tom will locate more information about other
schools with academic ranks to provide to the senate at the next meeting.
Action to be taken as a result of
discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline:
A
Survey Monkey questionnaire will be created. This will be sent to all faculty
(full-time and adjunct) to provide feedback on these two issues. If the votes
warrant change, we will take the necessary steps at that time.
Old Business:
Academic
Affair/ Institutional Effectiveness Concerns:
Follow-up
on Student Citizenship Issue: Todd spoke with Scott, and the citizenship issue
should not be a problem in the spring. The system has been fixed and they
should not be able to register for classes without this being complete.
Institutional
Effectiveness/ National Benchmark Data: Todd explained that we, as senate, are
not comfortable in reviewing or making a judgment about the collected data.
PAC
interviews: Transformative experience 200+ people were supposed to be contacted,
but only half were. The PAC got together to review the data collected. An issue
arose when the data was being entered, that called to question how the data was
being used. The faculty have legitimate concerns questioning what would happen
with the data. Todd assured us that something will and is being done despite
the slow process.
Senate
member roles, minutes, and agendas: We are running into a weird issue with our
Constitution. We must have all of the notes and minutes posted in seven
business days. If there are any corrections, or if the minutes are great, send
this information on so that minutes can be posted within the time frame
provided. If something is noticed after publication, an amendment can be made
after the official vote at the next meeting. Also, be sure to return to your
constituents to let them know that we are doing great things. Try to model the
transparency and communication that we expect as a whole.
Comments/Concerns:
There
will be an Institutional Development day in February.
Next meeting: January 2014 (Fulp 400)
Adjournment
at 6:12 p.m.
Name of Recorder: Stacey Frank
