Meeting Date: November 30, 2018
Location: SSC 205, Time: 12:30 p.m.
Members Present: Deborah DeMino, Meredith Dickens, Penny
Edwards, Pam Goodman, Eleanor Leverette, Som Linthicum, Robin McFall, Jeremy
McCracken, Michael Oates, Julia Seligson, James Walker, Gregg Westmoreland,
Derek Williams
Members Absent: Mary Gibson, Stacey Frank, Justin Herndon, Tracy
Kilgore, Laura McClain, Richard Reeves, Cynthia Swaney
Guests: Galen Dehay, Scott
Jaeschke
Presider: Mia Tensley
Welcome and Agenda: Mia called the meeting
to order at 12:31 pm and directed all in attendance to the agenda for the
meeting.
New Business:
1. Approval of minutes from November 2, 2018 –
Mia Tensley
Mia referred everyone to the minutes
from the November 2 meeting. These minutes had been posted in the Teams folder
for all to review. She asked if there were any changes other than those noted
in Teams. There were no other changes. The minutes were approved with changes
listed in Teams.
Action to be taken as a result of
discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline: Robin McFall will make the
changes from Teams, post the approved minutes to the Teams folder, and send
them to IT to post in the College Committees link under the Employee tab in eTC.
2. Constituent
Concerns – Mia Tensely
Mia stated the faculty member
with the concern contacted her stating that the issue had been resolved and did
not need to come to Faculty Senate
Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible,
and timeline: None
3.
Committee Updates – various senators
Mia asked for all senators who are members of other committees across
campus to give reports to keep everyone informed of happenings across the
College.
A.
AACC– Penny stated she had received an email from her
liaison containing updated leadership competencies. She plans to post a copy of
those in Teams in the AACC folder for Faculty Senate to review.
B.
Academic Calendar Committee – The committee has not met, so there is nothing
new to report.
C.
Curriculum Committee – The committee has not met, so
there is nothing new to report.
D.
Placement Committee – Julia stated the committee is finalizing
cut scores now and will have those complete the week of December 3. No later
than January 10, those scores will be in place and will apply to students who
enroll beginning with the summer 2019 term.
E.
Service Excellence – No report.
F.
21st Century Skills – Penny stated division
representatives are working on finalizing assessment plans with the technical
divisions. Arts and Sciences will be doing assessment just a bit differently.
In addition, Michael Oates will join the committee. Also, all divisions will
have some type of training/workshop/seminar on PD Day. She and Keri Catalfomo are
working with Marianne Yohannan to finalize the details on what the training
will look like.
G.
Additional committees
a.
Common Course Shells for Blackboard
The workgroup examining common course shells for online courses is still
functioning. This fall, BPS launched these common shells. Common shells will be
moved into the other divisions over the next few semesters. A&S will
implement in the summer with online and hybrid courses. There will be a faculty
coordinator to assist if needed.
H.
Academic Leadership – Mia shared that several items
from ALT.
a.
The College is currently working on a 10-Year Vision
and new Strategic Plan. She provided a PowerPoint showing the stages of this
plan:
Stage 1: Scanning the Environment (Current Phase)
Stage 2: Review/Revise Mission, Vision, Values
Stage 3: Practical Vision
Stage 4: Organizational Root Cause Analysis
Stage 5: Strategies
Stage 6: Strategic and Division Plans
Galen added that the process for achieving Stage 3 was approved on
Wednesday and said it will engage every employee at the College. We will
receive more details in the new year, and all will be able to provide
input/give ideas. Since this stage is such a large undertaking, there will be a
number of small consensus workshops to ensure all ideas are included
appropriately.
b.
Open Educational Resources – Mia shared that these are
teaching, learning, and research materials that reside in the public domain or
have been released under an open license. Therefore, they have no-cost access,
use, adaptation and redistribution by others with no or limited restrictions.
If there is an interest, we should let Mia or any other member of the ALT know
as the College is willing to provide infrastructure to help support.
c.
CAO Retreat – Mia stated that the average FTE statewide
for the technical college system is -5.37%. We have a +.18% FTE
Action to be taken as
a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline: All Senators should
update their constituents on what is happening around the College.
4.
Division Updates – various senators
Mia asked senators from each division to provide any relevant updates for
Faculty Senate.
a.
Arts and Sciences – no updates
b.
Business and Public Services – Meredith stated B&PS
has completed its SWOT analysis. Pam added that Business Technology is planning
its annual student event for the spring.
c.
College Transitions – no updates
d.
Engineering and Industrial Technology – E&IT will
complete its SWOT analysis next week. In addition, the division wants to
congratulate its Bosch Technical Scholars, five graduates who will have jobs
with Bosch since they have completed the program.
e.
Health Education – Susan Curtis will join Faculty
Senate.
f.
Learning Commons – Som Linthicum stated that we can go
look at the Affordable Learning tab in PASCAL for more information on OER. Also
PASCAL is moving to a new system, and TCTC can become part of that innovation.
We will be part of the Vanguard Innovation team to vet the rollout of this new
system. In addition, he expressed thanks to all faculty for sending students to
the Skill Shops. He stated participation in those workshops had been strong
this fall.
Action to be taken as
a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline: Senators
should share happenings/concerns from other divisions with their own
constituents to keep everyone informed.
Old Business:
1.
Constitution and By-laws – Mia Tensley
Mia shared the two recommendations made at the last Faculty
Senate meeting concerning potential ways to move forward with revisions of the
Constitution and By-laws. She stated
these were simply two ideas and asked if there were others. At that point,
Julia Seligson made a motion: "I move that we edit the process by which we
revise the current Constitution and By-laws by focusing only on Article III
which ties to officer duties, elections, and Faculty Senate membership."
Julia stated she was making this motion to help move Faculty Senate forward in
the revision process which has been at a standstill since meetings last spring.
Robin McFall seconded the motion. Penny and Som both asked for clarification,
wanting to know if this motion was to change the entire process and if it would
take into consideration previous Faculty Senate discussions on getting input from
faculty constituents. Julia said her intent/vision is to hold several small
group meetings in early January that would be open to Senators and to all
faculty for discussion of the current Article III, the proposed changes from
the ad-hoc group, and any other recommendations to update Article III. She
stated what she would like to see happen is a thorough discussion of Article
III. Meredith asked if she meant just the proposed changes. Julia stated she
thinks we need to begin with what is currently in place and proceed from there,
that the proposed changes are not the only possible resolution to what needs to
be updated/changed. She stated she thought we might keep parts of the current,
incorporate parts of the proposed, or even bring in ideas that have not yet
been considered; it would really all depend on the small group discussions.
Penny stated that while she thought the small group discussions are a good
idea, the proposed changes have parts of Article III spread throughout the
document. Julia stated she understood that, but she emphasized that we have to
focus on some part of the Constitution and By-laws to start, and Article III is
what seems to be the highest priority since we will hold elections in the
spring semester. She also said that what is in the Article III truly should be
able to stand alone and not be tied to other areas of the Constitution so much
that there would be confusion.
As Parliamentarian, Scott Jaeschke asked if she would be
open to a friendly amendment. Once he stated his amendment (scheduling a vote
at the next Faculty Senate meeting on Article III as written by the ad hoc
committee), Julia said she was not open to it as it was not what she was
intending. He withdrew his recommendation.
Som asked if it would be a good idea to incorporate both of
the recommendations from the previous meeting by having a side-by-side
comparison of the current Article III and the proposed. Meredith asked if it
would not be better to start with the proposed revision and then peel away what
we do not like from it as the proposed revision took hours and hours of work
from the ad-hoc group. She stated that starting with the current one would be
starting with a "holey version." Penny suggested we have a visual
map, based on the idea from Som of a side-by-side comparison. She stated her
willingness to create such a map. Julia reiterated that the biggest issue is
time sensitivity—that we have to come to some resolution concerning elections
and officer duties before the end of the spring semester. Jeremy McCracken
stated that he truly saw three issues here:
a.
The Constitution should be simple yet specific. The
current Constitution is simple, but not specific. So, starting with it makes
sense.
b.
While we are under a time crunch, we should already
have information from our constituents that we can bring to small group
discussions so that we do not take up time in Faculty Senate meetings.
c.
We must have some resolution in place by March to be
able to provide guidelines on elections and officer duties.
Jeremy stated we need to start somewhere, and he thought
what Julia is proposing gives a good starting place. Meredith asked if this
motion would mean that we as a Faculty Senate are then rewriting Article III.
Julia stated that was what she would expect to come of the small group
meetings.
After further discussion concerning timelines and
responsibilities, Julia agreed to revise the motion as follows: I move
that we edit the process for revising the current Constitution and By-laws to
focus only on Article III. A framework of the comparison of the current
Constitution and By-laws and the proposed revision will be provided to Faculty
Senate by January 4. The goal is a Senate-ratified final draft of Article III
by the end of the January 25 [Faculty Senate] meeting. Robin agreed that her second stands for the
revised motion.
To clarify, Mia stated that we would meet in informal small
groups to discuss and consider what should be the revision recommended proposed
for a vote on January 25. Julia and Mia stated they would work together to set
up several dates for the "idea sessions," possibly using the Activity
Periods. Deborah DeMino asked how the Senate envisions presenting the
information on January 25. Julia stated she envisions it being a revised
Article III that is ready for a Senate vote. Som called for the question. The
revised motion passed unanimously.
Action to be taken as
a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline: Mia and Julia
will schedule the meetings and let all Senators know the dates, times, and
locations. Penny will send the visual map to all Senators no later than January
4. Senators should share the upcoming small group meetings and what will take
place at those meetings with their constituents and encourage all faculty who
are interested to attend. Senators
should bring all input and ideas to the January 25 Faculty Senate meeting and
be prepared to revise Article III as needed.
2.
Plagiarism Rubric and Upcoming Survey – Mia Tensley and
Som Linthicum
Mia shared copies of the Student Code of Conduct from the SC
Technical System, Appendix III in the TCTC Catalog (which is a repeat of the
state code), and the TCTC Plagiarism Rubric. Som then discussed the need to
revise the rubric. He stated that our rubric uses the wording "learning
experience" while the state code says "completion of an educational
activity," yet neither truly outlines what such an experience/activity
would be. He also stated that the state code lists five potential sanctions
while the TCTC rubric lists only three. Mia stated that Faculty Senate will
receive a survey from Chris Marino in the next week asking for information that
can be used to help revise the rubric. The goal is to create a rubric with more
instructor discretion. When asked who had the task of revising, Galen stated it
would be a yet-to-be-determined work group. He added that the rubric had not
been updated since Robin McFall and he wrote it more than 10 years ago, but the
state code has been updated since that time. Galen also said that he has been
approving all penalties that make it to his desk, and he would like to have a
modicum of consistency.
Action to be taken as
a result of discussion, person(s) responsible, and timeline: Senators need
to complete the survey sent by Chris Marino no later than December 14.
Other Business:
1.
Posting of documents in Teams
Senators expressed thanks for having the agenda and the
minutes all posted in Teams.
Action to be taken as a result of discussion, person(s) responsible,
and timeline: Mia and Robin will continue
to post documents in Teams as well as on the College's blogspot for committees.
All senators will update constituents and direct them to the blogspot for
agendas and meeting minutes.
2.
Adjournment
Robin made a motion
to adjourn, and Julia seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 1:55
Respectfully submitted by Robin
McFall
Next Meeting: Friday, January 25 at 12:30 in SSC 205
