*********************************************

                DISCLAIMER: THIS CART FILE WAS PRODUCED FOR COMMUNICATION

    ACCESS AS AN ADA ACCOMMODATION AND MAY NOT BE 100% VERBATIM. THIS IS

    A DRAFT FILE AND HAS NOT BEEN PROOFREAD. IT IS SCAN-EDITED ONLY, AS

    PER CART INDUSTRY STANDARDS, AND MAY CONTAIN SOME PHONETICALLY

    REPRESENTED WORDS, INCORRECT SPELLINGS, TRANSMISSION ERRORS, AND

    STENOTYPE SYMBOLS OR NONSENSICAL WORDS. THIS IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT

    AND MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED, PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.

             THIS FILE SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED IN ANY FORM (WRITTEN OR

    ELECTRONIC) AS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OR POSTED TO ANY WEBSITE OR

    PUBLIC FORUM OR SHARED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE

    HIRING PARTY AND/OR THE CART PROVIDER. THIS IS NOT AN OFFICIAL

    TRANSCRIPT AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON FOR PURPOSES OF VERBATIM

    CITATION.

                     *********************************************





         October 1, 2021 Faculty Senate...



         >> RITA LENNON:  Welcome to October's senate meeting.  I'm your

    host, Rita Lennon.  I am doing this from Pima's Northwest Campus this

    time in hopes that I won't keep getting booted out like I did in

    September.

         For those of you I haven't had the opportunity to meet yet, my

    name is Rita Lennon and I'm the acting senate president, just for a

    short period of time potentially, maybe just through December, and

    then we'll see how things go.

         As I have mentioned a few times, I'm sorry if you have been in

    this meeting now for a little while, but there is a sign-in sheet in

    the chat if you wouldn't mind signing in.

         I'm also going to place in the chat the agenda.  The first thing

    that we need to do, as always, is to record who we are.  Senators,

    please make sure you also add the division that you are representing.

    I do ask that all guests, everyone, sign in.  We will do this through

    chat.  Just go ahead and place your name in chat and your division.

    Again, senators, if you wouldn't mind adding who you represent.

         Thank you.  I will just have everyone continue to do that in the

    background.  We will keep going.

         Any requests for agenda modifications?  I actually have a request

    for an agenda modification myself.  David Bea is here to help answer

    some questions about one of our other -- let me get to the agenda

    here -- about the class and compensation study.  But he does have a





    meeting at 2:15.  We are wondering if we are starting to get close to

    that time and we haven't been able to, then I'm going to move that up

    in our agenda, okay?  Is there anybody who has a problem with that?

    Any issues with that?  Please speak up.

         We also have an introduction of one of our new administrators we

    haven't been able to formally meet because of COVID closures and

    whatnot.  Phil, are you here?  I'm not hearing or seeing him.  No?

    Okay.

         Well, we'll go ahead and move on.  Should Phil come in a little

    bit later, we'll go ahead and ask him to introduce himself then.

         Are there any requests for short announcements?  Okay.  Not

    hearing or seeing any, we'll go ahead and move on to our next agenda

    item, which is the approval of the September meeting minutes.  I'm

    going to go ahead and place those in chat.  Please take a moment to

    look over them.

         Is there anybody musical in the meeting?  Have you sing while we

    are... (laughter).  You don't want me -- hey, Kelly.  Would you like

    to sing us something, Kelly?

         >> KELLY:  Not so much.  (Laughter.)  But thank you so much for

    asking.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  We can sing De Colores.  I can get

    us started.

         >> RITA LENNON:  There you go.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  You want me to?

         >> RITA LENNON:  Yes, please.  Why not?





         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  I haven't practiced.  But I will do

    a little bit, if I remember the words.

         (Singing De Colores.)

         I'll stop there.

         >> RITA LENNON:  That was beautiful.  Thank you.  (Applause.)

         That's what I love about senate meetings.  You never know what's

    going to happen at these meetings.  That's fantastic.

         Thank you, Provost.  That was wonderful.

         So we have had a moment to take a look at the September meeting

    minutes.  If I can have a request, a motion?

         >> KEN SCOTT:  Motion to approve.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.  Thank you, Lisa.  There is a second

    in chat.

         >> TAL SUTTON:  Want to add an addendum to make sure that -- I

    can just go in and go through the Zoom records and add the attendance

    logs, just to make sure that we have...

         >> RITA LENNON:  Good point.  That was not added onto our meeting

    minutes.  Very good.  That would be great.  We also have the

    recording, so I think between both of those, that should be

    sufficient.  Thank you.

         >> TAL SUTTON:  Sure.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Still on the table is a motion and a second.  Is

    there anybody -- well, we'll go ahead and put our ayes, nays, and

    abstentions, please, through chat.  Very good.  Thank you so much,

    everyone.  Okay.  Very good.





         All right.  Moving on to our next agenda item, which is agenda

    3B, we have Peter Newbegin from United Way here to present for us.

         Haven't seen Peter come in.  Let me just take a quick look.

         >> PETER NEWBEGIN:  I'm here.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  There he is.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.

         >> PETER NEWBEGIN:  Thank you.  Yes, so my name is Peter

    Newbegin.  I'm associate vice president for community development at

    United Way.  In that role I direct the Cradle to Career partnership.

    Whether or not you're aware of it, you are all a part of the Cradle

    to Career partnership.  Dolores is on our leadership council.  I will

    talk a little bit about what that is and what we do.

         I couldn't access the agenda.  Could you let me know how much

    time you had allotted for this so I can know how fast to talk?

         >> RITA LENNON:  Absolutely.  You have 10 minutes.

         >> PETER NEWBEGIN:  Perfect.  Thank you very much.

         In some conversations, we have leadership from the community,

    from our school districts, from education partners, but we realized

    that at that leadership level there was some engagement, in some of

    our networks there was, but as a broader community there wasn't a ton

    of awareness that this existed, that this partnership exists.

         Dolores invited to us come in and speak to some of the different

    groups at Pima about the partnership and what we do to just, one, for

    the purpose to raise awareness, and two, if anything that we talk

    about today sparks your interest either in your role or in some of





    the expertise you might have just in your personal education journey,

    invite you to get engaged in the work we are doing to improve

    education outcomes.

         I will also say I'm a proud Pima alum, and I have my Associate's

    in logistics and eventually got my Master's from USC, but Pima is

    better than USC and was a better educational experience.  I'm

    actively engaged also with the logistics advisory board there too,

    but that's in my personal capacity.

         I'm going to share my screen and I will go through my

    presentation in nine minutes (smiling) and give you a chance to ask

    any questions if you have any.

         The typical conversation that takes place in our community is

    something like this historically, where each of our sectors, each of

    our levels of education is pointing a finger back and saying where

    the problem is, where they are seeing the issue, the challenge.

    Elementary teachers wondering why kids can't read when they get

    there, middle school teachers, high schools wanting middle schools to

    prepare better, the workforce asking for better educated workers.  In

    this old model, all it was was pointing fingers and blame on

    different parts of the system.

         As the Cradle to Career partnership has stepped in about seven

    years ago, we have tried to break down these silos between these

    different areas and the different outcomes that we look for in

    educational, successful pathways, and break those down to the point

    where we can see the entire spectrum along the way and how supporting





    students and teachers at each one of these stages leads to a better

    educated workforce and a more successful, happy, thriving economy.

         Cradle to Career is a results-focused collaborative that's

    committed to ensuring the children in youth in Pima County have

    access and opportunities, access to opportunities and resources to

    succeed not only in school but in life, as well.

         We seek to have successful children and engaged community and a

    thriving economy, and we do that by preparing every child for success

    in school and life, and that ensures the economic vitality of our

    community.

         This is a lot of text, I'm sorry.  Our marketing team just put

    this together to send it out.  But really how we do that is through

    four main avenues.  We build a shared vision of community impact,

    which means coming up with common outcomes.  What do we want to see

    as an entire community together?  Looking at graduation rates, third

    grade reading, how many kids are in high-quality, early childhood

    education, how many college enrollments we have, also how many

    persist in college.  Aligning resources, getting data together to say

    where can resources have the biggest impact.  Then making sure that

    all of the different great work that's happening around the community

    isn't siloed, it's not just happening at one classroom or at one

    great nonprofit somewhere, that we're taking some of the really great

    results that are happening on a small scale and helping to build them

    up so they impact all of the students in our community and not just

    those in one lucky classroom.





         We also center equitable outcomes.  So in all the data we are

    looking at, we are disaggregating it, looking at how well are we

    doing as a community teaching all the different populations in our

    system and working together with those community members.

         We have youth voice.  That's a big part of the work that we do.

    We talk with teachers to ask where are you seeing the areas for

    improvement?  It's not just decision-makers at the top saying, hey,

    here is how we see a way to change things.  We are really looking at

    all of the levels of our system to engage the community to see how we

    can improve.

         The basic structure of our partnership is centered around a

    leadership council, and that's what Dolores is part of.  This has

    superintendents, CEOs, executive directors of nonprofits, business

    leaders from Raytheon, TEP, Caterpillar, coming together and saying,

    here, as a community, here is where we have the focus and here's

    where we have the resources.

         But those resources aren't always directed the best from the top

    down, aren't always.  Sometimes they have to be.  So we have

    leadership action and policy teams, but really the heart of our work

    lies in our change networks.  We call these change networks,

    specifically because we are not getting together just to give each

    other updates on cool programs that are happening.  Sometimes that's

    a good use of people's time, but what we are really doing is looking

    at where do we need to change the system in order to get better

    outcomes?  We use system process improvement, if you're familiar with





    a saying that says that every system is designed perfectly to get the

    results that it gets.

         When we are seeing results where 30 to 40% of our students, only

    30 to 40% of our third graders are reading at grade level by third

    grade, it's because we have a system that's designed to get that

    outcome, and what do we need to change in order to improve that?

         So in those networks, we have two kind of different ways of

    looking at this.  I supervise and manage what we call the backbone

    staff.  We have facilitators for some of these, for one or multiple

    of these networks, and we have data analysts.  We broker that data

    access, we unsilo data from different districts from our community

    and put it together and say how are we doing all together?

         We convene partners, we bring them together, do data coaching.

    We have capability building for continuous improvement.  That's the

    way that we create change.  Then we have our partners, and they are

    the ones that are actually doing this work.  They are the ones

    advocating for policy changes, changing practices on the ground

    either in a classroom or an entire organization or district.  They

    are testing out strategies that are going to remove barriers and

    mobilize resources.

         Especially at our leadership council, that's strategic

    decision-making that can eliminate disparities.  When we see the huge

    disparities in the community especially between Hispanic and Native

    American students and their White peers, we know we have to do

    something about it because we are doing something wrong and we need





    to change that.  We are about admitting that and looking forward to

    seeing how we can improve that and actually seeing gains in the data

    we are working in.

         So to get a little bit into the change network, this is kind of

    the cycle that we use where we are bringing people together that have

    that commitment to a certain area, one of our outcome areas.  We are

    looking at the data, testing out strategies, so we look at the data

    and then we say what are we going to do about this?  That's the big

    question.  We say how are we going to change this and how are we

    going to know it's having an impact?  It's the data and the

    improvement pieces.  Then we share those findings with the people who

    can influence policy, who can remove barriers, can find resources to

    address them.

         In these areas that I'm talking about, our main outcome areas are

    focused here.  Each of these goals represent what the data say are a

    significant milestone in a student's educational pathway.  We know if

    you hit each of these milestones, you have a really good chance of

    being successfully entering a good career.

         So kindergarten readiness, early grade literacy, middle school

    math, high school graduation, and postsecondary enrollment and

    completion.  We have a lot of partners from Pima who are working

    right now in our postsecondary, these two networks that we have

    focused in postsecondary.

         Underneath that, we also focus specifically on the reengagement

    of opportunity youth.  It's a term that is used and I think in the





    last few years has been more commonly accepted and people are aware

    of it.  Those are 16- to 24-year-olds who are not enrolled in school

    and not working.  We have a network of reengagement centers that

    works to do outreach to find where these students are and help get

    them back into a successful pathway.

         The reason why you see this entire spectrum here is because we

    know that the data say you can invest a ton in early childhood

    education, you'll get great results 15 years down the road, but we

    have thousands of kids who aren't getting that right now.  The data

    say you can have great results if you get to grade level reading at

    third grade.  Well, we have 65% of our kids who aren't there right

    now.  So we don't just focus on one of these areas, because we know

    there are students right now in our community who need support in

    each of these places, in each of these outcomes.

         In the data work that we do, we really try to say that we use

    data as a flashlight and not as a hammer.  Too often in our community

    the data is dropped down and you say you're only getting 30%,

    something's wrong with the schools, only 30% of your kids are reading

    at grade level.  Well, we are going to break that down or we're going

    to use the data to say why that's happening and what we can do to

    make it better rather than just shifting blame around the community

    so the school says it's not our fault, the community says -- the

    school center says it's not our fault, the community-based learning

    place says the school has to do better.  We are about taking that

    away and eliminating the perception that that initial cartoon showed.





         What we have done in the last few years has really been able to

    grow this network, so we are having some real impact.  Right now we

    have 2,000 more three- and four-year-olds in high-quality preschool

    than we had in two years past.  We are currently working with over 40

    elementary teachers at this point who are using data to improve

    literacy instruction, impacting over 1,100 students we are seeing

    increased outcomes from.

         We have actually in our last count over a thousand opportunity

    youth working with the reengagement centers that we help to fund and

    coach to receive services reconnecting them to educational and career

    pathways.  A specific project we worked on last year that we are

    really proud of because this was the brainchild of our youth council,

    so we have a group of 8 to 10 youth we work with that we co-develop

    programs and solutions with, and last year they were very focused on

    civic engagement, especially of the opportunity youth population.

    When you think about youth engagement in voting, oftentimes it's done

    through the schools.

         In our community, we have an estimated 20 to maybe at this point

    40,000 youth who are not connected to schools, and these are often

    the ones who are "the" most impacted by the policies that are being

    created and have the least amount of voice.

         So our opportunity youth really wanted to put together something

    that would encourage them to vote.  During the pandemic our

    opportunity youth leaders registered over 500 youth who had never

    voted before and mobilized and had commitments from over 5,000 17- to





    21-year-olds who had never voted before who were disconnected from

    the traditional pathways of civic engagement.

         Here in Arizona, there was a big impact that we had from that.  I

    can leave it at that.  We are a nonpartisan organization.

         As part of the work that we are doing, this isn't just something

    that came up with this collective impact collaborative impact model.

    This started in Cincinnati with a group that was doing this, and

    found really great results, has spawned a nationwide network of

    partnerships doing similar work to bring people together.

         Across the country, there are over 70 communities that are

    working with this model impacting over 12 million children, and

    really engaging the community, advancing equity, developing cultures

    of continuous improvement, and leveraging existing resources.

         So it's one thing to try to continually look for new resources

    but we know there are some resources out there and how can we

    leverage and align them to have better impact.

         As a StriveTogether sustaining member, which is the milestone we

    have reached in this national network, we have significant funding

    from them.  We use data analysis tools, we have connections to peer

    communities that we can use not just from my backbone staff but for

    other community partners.  If you hear about something great

    happening in Boston or San Antonio, we have opportunities to be able

    to connect people across the country who are practicing the same

    methods or testing the same strategies.

         So I think that I got my typical half-hour presentation in in





    just about a good amount of time.  I wanted to leave just a few

    minutes for questions, and then tell you also this is a blank page

    for next steps, because really here at this presentation to you, it

    was about raising awareness with you, but if something in this last

    few minutes sparked your interest, I encourage you to reach out to

    us.

         You can also reach out through Dolores.  She's a Cradle to Career

    partner, on our leadership council, and let us know.  Like I said, it

    doesn't have to be in your specific role like, you know, as a faculty

    at Pima.  Maybe you have some expertise or background and good

    practices in middle school math and you're really interested in that

    piece.  Maybe you're interested in the outcomes, how do we get more

    kids to get back into high school who dropped out during the

    pandemic, if it's a personal passion of yours.

         I encourage you to get engaged and involved in this and take

    advantage of the resources that we have being a part of this

    partnership.

         So thank you very much.  I appreciate it.  I will take any

    questions you have now.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.  Denise, you're up.

         >> DENISE REILLY:  I know we are really short on time, so I just

    wanted to ask, how long have we been in this partnership?  Who else

    are you connected with at Pima other than Dolores?  I'm just curious

    about that.  I worked in the career realm for the last few years, and

    this is the first I have heard of this partnership.





         >> PETER NEWBEGIN:  Thank you very much.  That's one of the

    reasons why we wanted to come and involve more of the people who are,

    organizations that we claimed as partners and we realized we had

    dozens or hundreds of people at those organizations who had no idea

    what it was.

         Pima has been in this since the beginning, so seven years or

    eight years almost now at this point.  But our postsecondary networks

    that I talked about, the completion and enrollment networks, have

    just started this year.  We finally got some funding that was

    specifically around convening people to talk about those two outcome

    areas.  I can't name everybody who has been a part of Pima, but I

    think we have at least five or six different people from Pima.

         If you're interested, too, feel free to reach out, I can let you

    know who is a part of that and if you want to connect with them and

    hear what those conversations are like, and what are some of the

    areas.

         I know what they have really been focusing on is creating better

    pathways and onramps for students.  We have done a lot of focus

    groups with disconnected youth specifically who don't get those same

    college counseling opportunities, and how do you get into Pima, how

    do we work with advisors more closely to have them understand how

    that supports students and work through that.

         >> DENISE REILLY:  Thank you.

         >> PETER NEWBEGIN:  Thank you.

         I will absolutely put my e-mail in the chat for you here, and I





    encourage you to annoy Dolores, because it's part of her role as one

    of our leadership council members to help connect you.  She does a

    great job.  She's one of our best leadership council members in terms

    of connecting people.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Thank you, Peter.

         Denise, I think Hilda is involved, Brian Stewart, David Arellano,

    and I can't remember -- I think Jeff Thies, as well, I think.  I'll

    get the list, and I'll be able to share it to all the senators.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  You're welcome.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Peter, thank you so much for being here and

    presenting a half-hour presentation in the ten minutes we were able

    to give you.  Appreciate that.

         Senators, if you will do what he has asked, either reach out to

    him or to bug Dolores, annoy Dolores with more, thank you so much.

         >> PETER NEWBEGIN:  Thank you so much.  I really appreciate the

    opportunity.  Have a great day.  Thank you, Pima, for everything you

    do.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Thank you, Peter.

         >> RITA LENNON:  You're welcome to stay for the rest of the

    meeting or you can bow out if you need to.

         >> PETER NEWBEGIN:  Thank you very much.  Have a great weekend,

    everyone.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  You too.  Bye-bye.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Very cool.  Yeah, education does have a bad





    habit of pointing fingers, don't we, so it's good to see something

    like that.

         So up next in our agenda we have an update about gen ed

    committee, and I didn't spring this on her, so the college curriculum

    council, however, before we go into that, I do want to explain why we

    are talking about this in senate meetings.

         A lot of us are on committees, most of us are on multiple

    committees, but there is really no avenue for us to get this

    information back to senators and just to explain what the committees

    are doing, what their thought processes are.

         So I thought it was a good thing we could possibly invite some

    chairs, co-chairs, senator members to come back and just at our

    monthly meetings explain what's going on, what they are working on,

    and answer any questions if we have them.

         Without taking up any more time for our meeting, Kimlisa, you are

    on.

         >> KIMLISA DUCHICELA:  Okay.  Hola.  Hi, everyone.  Good

    afternoon.

         I am the new co-chair for the general education committee.  I

    stepped in to fill the very capable shoes of Rita who stepped in to

    fill the capable shoes of Josie.  We are like dominoes here.

         A few new things are going on in the committees.  I sit on CCC

    and on GE, and with GE committee, we are going to be doing things a

    little bit differently.  First of all, as the CCC has already started

    doing, GE committee is going to start using Curriculog to make





    decisions on the Cs, the Gs, SB, humanities, and all of the rest of

    the GE designations.

         So the process will be that instead of coming to us directly,

    you'll be putting in the information just as you do for curriculum

    changes into Curriculog for GE designations.  If you don't know how

    to use Curriculog, there are trainings every Friday.  You can reach

    out to the curriculum office and they should get you set up.

         The other thing that I wanted to make you aware of is that we do

    have, we just recently went through and we revamped what it means to

    be a G or a C or humanities or social sciences.  All of those have

    recently been revamped and redone, and again, the curriculum office

    has that information for you.  We have been working on it for some

    time.  The GE committee has done an amazing amount of work in the

    last year, year and a half.  So all of those things are in place.

         My co-chair is Michael Parker.  Because he actually has quite a

    few GE classes in his division, so I think it's a really nice fit.

    Because we are using Curriculog, we will be meeting normally once a

    semester unless there is something going on that requires us to meet

    more often, if there is questions of things that came in or some kind

    of issue, but I believe that this will streamline the process of

    these designations and help get them through the process much more

    quickly.

         It will also help us capture real documentation on why something

    is approved or not approved or if there is questions.  I also believe

    that this will work very well as we move forward.  There have been





    some changes with, you know, the GEs with regard to transfer classes

    over to the universities.  I guess they are redoing their

    designations as well which may come back to impact us.  We may have

    to adjust, and the GE committee will be ready to do so should we need

    to.

         But I did want to, for those of you who don't know me, introduce

    myself and let you know that I am the co-chair.  I'm PimaOnline.  As

    far as I know I'm the only Duchicela that's a faculty at Pima, so I'm

    kind of easy to find.  If you have any questions, I will answer them

    to the best of my knowledge.  If I don't have an answer, I can tell

    you who to send an e-mail to.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.  Are there any questions for Kimlisa?

         >> KIMLISA DUCHICELA:  Going once, going twice...

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you, Kimlisa.  I would like whoever is on

    senate and also in any other standing committee, please e-mail me and

    just let me know which committees you are a member of and then I'm

    going to ask you to speak at one of our upcoming meetings and just

    give us a heads-up.

         Thank you, Kimlisa.

         >> KIMLISA DUCHICELA:  You are so welcome.  Have a great weekend,

    everybody.

         >> RITA LENNON:  You too.  You're staying, right?  You're not

    leaving us?

         >> KIMLISA DUCHICELA:  No, I'm so gone.  Sorry.  (Laughter.)

    Bye, guys.





         >> RITA LENNON:  I would like to modify the agenda just a little

    bit, if you don't mind, just move D and E.  Makyla, I hope you don't

    mind, but I do know Dave Bea has another meeting to get to so I want

    to have enough time for us to ask him any questions.

         So we're going to move to item No. 3E, class and compensation

    study update with Tal and Ken.

         >> TAL SUTTON:  Thanks, Rita.  So I guess I will be speaking

    first and then Ken can fill in any holes I might have missed.

         Yeah, the faculty members on the faculty steering committee just

    feel that we need to start figuring out how best to kind of

    disseminate what we are experiencing and what's going on with the

    class and comp study.  So we are starting here to share kind of our

    experiences and give you a window into that and then maybe, since

    Dave Bea is here, he can kind of give us some insight on the other

    side of what's happening.

         As everyone here knows, the class and comp study began almost a

    year ago at this point, and the faculty steering committee has met,

    you know, eight or nine times at this point.  I guess where we are at

    right now is the Segal consultants have early preliminary analyses

    from the peer institutions that they have identified and were

    approved by the ELT.

         So they have used the summertime to kind of generate this

    analysis, and there has been some question amongst the members of the

    faculty steering committee as to what our role as faculty are in

    providing input and feedback and direction into this process.





         There does seem to be a potential disconnect.  So I will say that

    we are talking with Dolores and Kate about what the expectations are

    for the faculty steering group in this process, and they have been

    helpful in sort of trying to improve the transparency of this process

    that we have better information moving forward.

         That said, where we are currently, we do feel that there is kind

    of an opaqueness to the process and perhaps a disconnect in the

    expectations.  For example, the Segal team, like I said, has these

    preliminary results on what the pay is across these peer

    institutions, and they are going to kind of look at that and see how

    Pima faculty compare to the faculty of this analysis.

         We, on the faculty steering committee, thought that we would have

    more input or more access at least to their methodologies in

    generating this analysis.  So we are asking to get increased access

    to the data as well as their decision-making and methodology and just

    so we can better understand the analysis.

         From our understanding, the charge of the faculty steering

    committee mostly is to serve as liaisons to faculty, and so we are

    trying to find ways to share what we know to you guys as well as

    collect input to bring back to our meetings, but that's proving to be

    an interesting balance to find due to the fact that the preliminary

    results are preliminary and Segal's sort of apprehensive to share

    them at large in the possibility that they can be construed as final

    analyses, which they are not.

         And I understand that, but we are trying to kind of work out a





    better way to figure out what can we share with faculty, so hopefully

    you'll get more information from us soon.  I don't know.  Dolores and

    Kate have already started asking about that to help us with that, and

    I appreciate that.

         So right, our charge, it seems like, was to mostly provide input

    and feedback to the Segal team about how, after they have done their

    analysis, they want to kind of utilize our expertise and our

    institutional knowledge to kind of optimize how that could map on to

    faculty at Pima.

         Where the disconnect arises is the fact that we are supposed to

    -- we had no say or no understanding of how this analysis was

    generated, and so I think before we, as the faculty members on the

    steering committee, feel comfortable doing that mapping, we would

    like to believe the robustness of their analysis and, you know,

    essentially how can we have buy-in, faculty buy-in into this report

    or this process if the numbers seem like they kind of come out of

    this magic box.

         So that's why we are asking for more access to the data, more

    access to the methodology and their decision-making and how they

    classified things in their analyses, so on and so forth.

         So we are talking with the provost who is helping us with that,

    and so our hope is to get access to more of the internal workings of

    their analyses so that when we do get those numbers that are supposed

    to get mapped on to Pima faculty that we can at least understand and

    recognize that they are defendable numbers and they make sense and





    that they are accurate predictions of our peer institutions.

         So we are trying to -- we basically want to have more

    transparency in their analysis before we move on to the next step of

    trying to see how that analysis can map and fit into the uniqueness

    of Pima.

         And then just to reiterate one more time, we are also looking for

    ways to figure out how we can better serve as liaisons.  As I said,

    it's been hard to figure out what exactly of the analysis we can and

    cannot share, or ask for Segal what exactly they are looking for,

    when they are looking for faculty input and feedback, we hope we can

    come back to you when we know that more concretely.

         Anyway, I think that's kind of where we are at.  The faculty

    steering committee faculty members want more access to the Segal

    analysis to better understand it, and then I think after that, after

    we understand it, we would be more comfortable moving to the next

    step of seeing how that could map on to and fit into the Pima

    structure, and then similarly, as being the people that are

    representing faculty in this process, we are trying to figure out how

    we can better open up lines of communication to liaison, if I can use

    that there.

         I don't know if Ken has anything else to add, but I'm sure Dave

    Bea can maybe offer some insight into maybe the next steps of this

    report or how it's going to be used or something like that.

         >> RITA LENNON:  I did also want to mention that Aida Vasquez is

    here too.  But, Ken, please go ahead.





         >> KEN SCOTT:  So there has been a lot of talk lately, you know,

    about the class and comp study, what's going on with the class and

    comp study, and there has been a lot of chatter, I dare use the word

    "rumor" about what's going on with compensation and all that stuff.

         So the purpose of us providing this information is just to kind

    of keep everyone updated, and if you could again keep your areas

    updated, your ed divisions, just where we are at at this point, we

    are not disagreeing with any outcomes because we don't have outcomes

    yet.  We are still working on it.

         We have been given some data that's again still in process.  We

    are having a difficult time interpreting that information.  As Tal

    said, we have asked for more detailed information so that we can look

    at the raw data and make our own assessment on how we should

    interpret that.

         We have also had some concerns brought up about how some groups

    have been compared to data.  Just for example, librarians, you know,

    what exactly, like what benchmark are they being compared to?  That

    hasn't really been explained.  Just again, trying to get more clarity

    so that when the time comes that we are ready or that the time that

    Segal is ready to roll out their final data that we have, you know,

    some kind of understanding as to how to interpret that.

         That's all I had on my list.  We would love to share more.  We

    really would.  We're just not there yet.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you, Ken.  Thank you, Tal.

         At this time, I think it would be important to open for questions





    and let any of the experts answer.

         >> DR. DAVID BEA:  Yeah, would it be beneficial at this point to

    sort of put some overarching context around it to help with this and

    sort of reassure folks that all is not lost and so forth?

         >> RITA LENNON:  Right.

         >> DR. DAVID BEA:  Because listening to that, I'm also dismayed

    and concerned.  But I want to put some context around it, and I think

    it will help a little bit and then give some reassurance.

         So while the program has been going for some time, there's a

    certain amount of work that's behind the scenes that leads into sort

    of where we're at now.  So from now until the next few months is when

    things become much more important in terms of getting the feedback

    from the steering committee, making sure that folks understand.

         So I'm most dismayed about the fact that there is I think concern

    about not understanding the methodology.  So looking back, I want to

    share with everybody here.  So the methodology for the part that we

    are talking about right now is that Segal, which is the firm that is

    a specialty firm in this, this is their expertise, they are much more

    knowledgeable about class and comp studies than anyone at the college

    would be.

         We hired them to come in, take a look at our class comp structure

    for regular employees, so faculty and staff.  Faculty information is

    a little bit ahead of the staff because the definition of faculty

    positions is more confined, right?  It's clearer what the definition

    what a faculty position is, as opposed to you've got all kinds of





    different accounting-type positions, all kinds of different student

    services positions, all kinds of different workforce positions.  All

    of those kinds of things have different roles and responsibilities

    and skills and things like that.

         So faculty is a little bit easier to sort of get as a whole at

    the beginning.  That doesn't make it easier in the end, but I'm

    saying it makes it a little bit easier to gather the data up front.

         So what Segal shared, this is going back in time before the

    summer break, was the methodology of how they compile the

    market-based data.  So right know what we are talking about is what's

    been compiled so far as market-based data.

         It's not what is the college's structure going to be?  Because

    remember the class comp structure is it's looking at how the scales,

    how the structures are, and how compensation will go forward, what

    was done years and years ago by Fox Lawson, which is woefully

    outdated and problematic now.

         So the idea is we want to revise that whole structure.  One of

    the first steps is let's take a cue and take a look at what the

    market situation is.

         What they did is put together their methodology for how did they

    do this, and quickly, to summarize it, I won't go into all the

    details, but they look at usable data.  Most of the data they are

    looking at is from CUPA, College and University Personnel

    Association, HR data, so that's data that a bunch of institutions

    through surveys annually provide information to CUPA, and they then





    contract to get access to that information.

         Usually that kind of information is proprietary, because the CUPA

    would have spent money to compile the information.  So personally,

    I'm not sure if it is confidential, but it was possible and I think

    there's a pretty good chance it is.  That doesn't mean we can't get

    generalities but we may not be able to get the raw data.  Just

    putting that out there, because I know that's one thing that was

    mentioned.

         However, nevertheless, the methodology needs to be crystal clear

    and people need to understand it.  So the idea is then you identify

    what institutions are you going to compare yourself against?

         For us, it's looking at a group of peer institutions.  That's

    where they talk with faculty steering committee, that's where they

    talk with administration, that's where they sort of gleaned who would

    be peer institutions.  Some of it is obvious.  Like Maricopa, I know

    that came up in the question.  Maricopa is an obvious comparator for

    a number of reasons.

         So what institutions make sense?  They then look at the various

    faculty who we have, the data that we have for our currently-existing

    faculty, and then they map it against that.

         There are some determinations that have to be made, one of which

    is let's look at the institutions that they select.  They want to

    select, in order for it to be a good sample, they want to have at

    least 40 institutions.  The details that they get might vary because

    different institutions provide different details.  So I know that the





    sample they have right now has really strong detail information for

    27 but it's also based on 82 institutions.

         The question comes up then also is what else do you consider?

    What they looked at are ranges of expenditures, ranges of size in

    terms of the number of positions that they have.  We asked them to

    look at regional proximity, because one of the things that becomes

    important about why would you include the rural colleges in Arizona

    is that because financially we are structured similarly.  That has an

    effect on how we pay and what rules we have to follow statutorily in

    the state in terms of compensation and so forth.  So there are

    reasons to include the rurals.

         I know that caused some concern, and what we have already talked

    with Segal about is looking at the data with the rural institutions

    included and then look at it without.

         Now, the fact that the data is based on so many institutions,

    like 80 institutions, I don't think it's actually going to change

    very much, but we definitely are willing to share that.

         By the way, I'm saying "we."  I wasn't there.  But I'm looking at

    what the materials were that they went through, sort of how that

    comes to be, what institutions do they look at.  Then they grab that

    information, and then they start mapping it against the employees

    that we have, or in this case the faculty we have.

         They have some information like zip codes, what areas people are

    teaching in, what the education and experience levels are.  So the

    idea is you want to map it as closely as possible to the sample to





    get an idea where are we in terms of a total market compensation.

    That's the first piece.

         And again, what I would say, and to give the first bit of

    reassurance, is it sounds like we need to go through and make sure

    that you all on the committee understand it better and that we give

    you some tools so you can report back out, because it sounds like

    you're not so clear enough that you can report back to Faculty Senate

    to explain that.  And, you know, we will take that responsibility on

    and work with the faculty steering committee on that.

         Then the other piece is that I know there has been some concern

    about the steering committee feels like it's a one-way flow of

    information, here's what we're going to give you, and you go share

    it, or something to that effect.

         That's not what the intent is, and that's not what the future is

    going to be.  That's where the next steps become really important to

    get feedback and buy-in and so forth.

         I will say, going back in time, so we already know we want to

    look at with and without the rural colleges, so the feedback has been

    heard and it's going to be addressed.  Another example of it was when

    we were working with the steering committee, identified that some of

    the supplemental pay and the department chair structures and some of

    those other things, the academic workforce, there were more

    complexities and nuances than were in the base contract, and so we

    went to the board and got a supplement to the contract so that Segal

    could work with us and help us more completely with that information.





         So I'm saying that as there is evidence that feedback is coming

    back, and we're adapting.  It's not working as well as we wanted to,

    but that's where we are going to work more with the steering

    committee and make sure it's clear what they can communicate, it's

    clear how it's working, and so forth.

         Now, going forward after the market-based information, there are

    next steps, which will be looking at what different salary structures

    will look like, grades and steps and all of those kinds of things

    that you're familiar with -- I'm using the current terminology --

    they will be coming up with recommendations.  That's where the

    feedback is going to be even more important, because it's going to be

    making sure the college understands does this fit the college's

    needs?  Do people understand how this works?  Is this going to be

    working for everybody?

         But one of the things we need to know is are we way out of whack

    in terms of market pay because we need to make some adjustments and

    factor that into the new structure.

         Now, what preliminarily, what that's likely to show is that some

    positions versus market might be high and some might be low, and so

    then the college is going to have to figure out, and once we come up

    with this new structure and some are low, how is the college going to

    plan for addressing those that are low, right?  What is the plan to

    get that pay up?

         So let me give you, I'm going to give you the extreme example

    because it makes the point.  If it comes back and the market studies





    say that the college is underpaying everybody by $20 million --

    again, I'm making up a big number so you get the point here -- we

    still have to find a way to do that, right?  So there is still going

    to be a plan that we're going to have to put in place and we're going

    to have to work really closely with all of the staff and faculty on

    what that plan looks like, because if it's so big that we can't do it

    in one year, we have to all come up with, okay, how are we going to

    prioritize, what do we do the first year, what do we do the second

    year, and so forth?

         So there is going to be a lot of interchange back and forth and

    communication back and forth, particularly that's when the rubber is

    going to hit the road is at that point.

         Nevertheless, I do want to go back to the beginning and say,

    "Hearing you."  We will make sure that there is better communication

    going to that steering committee.  I will put one caveat out there,

    which is one of the key members of the team had a personal loss, so

    we may be rescheduling or bumping that next meeting, which is

    scheduled to be in a week or two, it might get bumped by a week or

    something, but it is completely for that reason I just said, not

    because of what we are talking about here.  They did have a pretty

    significant personal loss that affected their timeline and ability to

    work on the project.

         Okay.  I have said a lot.  Now I will open up for questions based

    on what I have said there.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.  Ken?





         >> KEN SCOTT:  I just wanted to clarify that the committee has

    not been able to really be involved in the process or to really

    provide feedback.  They have simply gone off and done their thing,

    they have come back, and then they have presented us with information

    that we have then been asked not to share with anyone because it's

    ongoing.

         We would like to be able to get some information out, you know,

    to the faculty as soon as possible, and we'd like to be involved in

    the process.  We don't want for Segal to just run through this, get

    to the end and go, hope you guys like it.  That is not what we want.

    Then we certainly don't want to be, the faculty committee to say, oh,

    well, the faculty were involved with this the entire time.

         So that's where we're at now is we simply wish to be involved, we

    want to get clear information, and we want to be able to have an

    impact on what that final outcome is going to be.

         >> DR. DAVID BEA:  Uh-huh.

         >> KEN SCOTT:  That's our hope.  Thus far, we haven't gotten to

    play much of a role yet.

         >> DR. DAVID BEA:  Got it.  Thanks.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Any other questions?  I see them now.  Sarah is

    next.

         >> SARAH JANSEN:  I just have a concern to voice on behalf of

    adjunct faculty.  So we learned in our adjunct faculty meeting

    earlier today that Segal has not been looking at adjunct faculty

    data?  Is that correct or incorrect?





         >> DR. DAVID BEA:  Right.  So the contract that we have with

    Segal is to focus first on regular positions, so regular faculty and

    staff.  Again, now, remember the class comp is not just pay.  This is

    is not just are we at market base for pay.  This is about creating

    salary and grade structures and addressing what is an outdated system

    that we currently have.

         So the first priority for the college is, and this has been a

    number of years we have wanted to do this, is to do the regular

    faculty and staff first.  That does not mean we don't look at market

    pay for adjunct faculty.  We do that routinely.  We do what we can.

    On top of it, I have also heard that concern and I have another

    meeting with Sean Mendoza this afternoon to talk about his concerns.

         We will be addressing those sort of on the side, but that the

    structure, this is about class comp in terms of regular positions.

    That's the priority, and that's what the contract was originally for.

         Whether we do adjunct faculty in a similar way after this is

    done, I think that's entirely plausible.  But this is a big enough

    project to take on, and it has a huge impact on all of the employees,

    all the regular employees at the college.

         >> SARAH JANSEN:  I'm just a little bit confused, because if

    restructuring is one of the goals, it just seems like looking at

    adjunct faculty issues and data is really important, because a lot of

    staff are adjunct faculty, or there is full-time faculty who become

    adjunct faculty or vice versa, and these are not, you know, rigid

    roles, right, at the college.  So I'm just curious why...





         >> DR. DAVID BEA:  Well, again, I said something a minute ago,

    which is we are routinely looking at adjunct faculty pay and the

    structures that they have.  I look at -- every year when we go

    through the budget, we are looking at where is the adjunct faculty

    pay, where does it compare to -- things we look at are livable wage

    information, we look at it versus our peer institutions in Arizona,

    and I think that branching that out outside of Arizona is something

    we also want to look at.

         I'm saying we will be doing that, but in terms of this kind of a

    comprehensive study, this is a really massive undertaking to look at

    all of the regular jobs and positions at the college.  We can do that

    more on the side, and then if we need to pull in some external

    expertise for adjunct faculty in the future, I'm totally open to

    that.  But this is a big enough project on its own.

         >> SARAH JANSEN:  Thank you.

         >> DR. DAVID BEA:  No, and thanks for the feedback.  I don't want

    to say I don't think it's a good point.  I think those are all really

    good points.  I do want to point out there are things we do on a

    regular basis to look at compensation for those positions in

    particular.  And we will be talking to Sean this afternoon and

    getting his take, as well.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.  Makyla?

         >> MAKYLA HAYS:  Thanks.  First of all, thank you, Dr. Bea, for

    coming and sharing that our feedback is getting back to you.  That is

    encouraging, as well as thank you for acknowledging those eight rural





    colleges, which has been a big source of concern to make sure that we

    can get that data.

         I just want to thank you for that part.  I just want to clarify

    potentially, and maybe this is why Tal's hand is up, as well, Segal

    and Pima has this chart of the order of the study that keeps getting

    presented to us, like it's we are going to do this first, this first,

    and then the color changes when we finish it.

         To be clear, that methodology of the order of things happening,

    is not what's being questioned.  So we know what order we are going

    in, we know where we stand and where we are kind of at in the

    process.

         The methodology that I believe Ken and Tal were saying that we

    weren't sure of is, for example, like who were the librarians

    benchmarked against?  They weren't benchmarked against the same list

    of comparative institutions, so it just says "industry."  We want the

    librarians particularly but all of us want to know which people, what

    institutions, who were they benchmarked against.  They didn't really

    get to have a say in who they were benchmarked against.

         And then also, we got the list of institutions that we were

    benchmarked against, and then we got some very, very vague data.  The

    methodology we are questioning is how did we get from the list of

    institutions to the vague data.  The data is -- it looks like we are

    starting to get some clarification, but it's still not -- I mean,

    it's still not to the level that we would need it in order to

    actually say that we had confidence in the analysis that was given to





    us.

         I think that's where faculty want to say we understand where this

    came from, we can see the numbers, we can stand and make choices

    based off of this solid data.  We are struggling at the moment with

    what was given to us to be able to say that there is confidence in

    those numbers at this point, and I think that methodology.  Just to

    be clear, as you're going through this with Segal, like where did

    these numbers come from?  Where did the median range come from?

    Where did those numbers get decided?  How was this done?

         >> DR. DAVID BEA:  Yeah, no, it sounds like a little more detail

    about how do you get from -- so you get a summary page or something

    like that that has an overarching numbering and you have a

    preliminary page that has a lot of variables, and then you don't have

    the, well, what's the magic black box in the middle that got you to

    the end?

         To me, that's relatively simple.  We can have them sort of walk

    through -- again, whether they can actually share the actual data,

    because again, it might be proprietary, but we certainly can do the

    methodology in detail, right, show you the calculation in

    hypothetical or with a specific example and say this is how it works,

    you take this, you multiply this times this, average that, and then

    you that's how you get to this thing.

         I think that's totally fair.  I totally get that.  That's a

    totally fair statement or fair request, and we can do that.  I don't

    think that will be hard to do.





         >> MAKYLA HAYS:  Thank you.

         >> KEN SCOTT:  I'm going to line-jump here, only because we are

    pressed for time here in the Faculty Senate, not that this isn't a

    great conversation at all that we care very deeply about --

         >> DR. DAVID BEA:  I feel a feeling we will be talking again

    about this (smiling).

         >> KEN SCOTT:  Possibly we could do a separate meeting, little

    bit more detailed, but Tal's got one last question and then we're

    going to have to move on.

         >> TAL SUTTON:  It was mostly a comment based on, piggybacking on

    what you and Makyla already said.  The faculty members of the

    steering committee are willing to do our homework.  We aren't getting

    much beforehand, and we'd be happy to get stuff to look at and pour

    over and scratch our heads regarding.

         So we are happy to do our homework.  I just want to put that out

    there.  We are interested in this, and we want to know it and

    understand it.

         >> DR. DAVID BEA:  Great.  No, we are going to tap into that.  I

    think we have underutilized that resource.  We will figure out how to

    find a happy middle.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Okay.  I guess we have to put a pin in this for

    now.  Thank you so much for everyone who was here, who raised

    concerns, and, David, I know you have another meeting to go to.  I

    appreciate it.

         >> DR. DAVID BEA:  Like I said, I'm sure that I will be back





    talking to you.  I hope you all have a great rest of the day.  Talk

    to you soon.

         >> RITA LENNON:  All right.  Very good.

         All right.  Let's move on to our next -- sorry, I was distracted.

    There were squirrels outside my window type of thing.  We will just

    leave it at that.

         Next thing we have is Makyla Hays.  Thank you for allowing me to

    swap you two around.  Take it away.

         >> MAKYLA HAYS:  This should be fairly short.  I totally just got

    distracted by the comment that said "squirrels."  Easily distracted

    right here (smiling).

         So my comment is about the student code of conduct, and a faculty

    member has brought it to our attention that if a student violates the

    netiquette standards that we post in our online courses and possibly

    our face-to-face courses, that's not necessarily a code of conduct

    violation.

         Based on situations that have occurred, it seems like maybe the

    code of conduct needs to be looked at again to make sure that our

    behavior and communication expectations in online courses are clear

    and leaves the students with enough guidelines of what they need to

    do while supporting the faculty with our student code of conduct if

    those guidelines are broken.

         For example, cursing in an e-mail or in discussion posts may not

    apparently necessarily be a violation of code of conduct, and has

    left a couple faculty members feeling that they didn't -- they





    weren't able to pursue a level of a violation that they would be able

    to pursue in a face-to-face course if that were to happen there.

         I think Suzanne's area is who is in charge of the student code of

    conduct, so we thought it was appropriate to maybe bring it to

    Faculty Senate to get some eyes on making sure that that is looked at

    with the light of how much online education, virtual education we are

    doing so that faculty are supported, expectations are clear for

    students, and that netiquette standards can be enforced.

         I don't know where to go from here, but that is the issue that we

    have.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.  I appreciate that.

         Originally we had asked Suzanne Desjardin to be here, as well.

    Because of conflicts of schedules and not clear communication

    probably from me she wasn't able to attend today.

         We are going to -- I do believe the provost, vice provost, all of

    them involved, Irene, will be talking more amongst themselves and

    figuring out where we go from here.  And so if we need to get a task

    force together or, you know, whatever we need to do in Senate, we

    will be doing.  And of course PCCEA, we will be working together to

    collaborate and work forward from that.

         I thought it was important to just bring it up, leave it on the

    agenda for that purpose, and we will move forward as action items

    later on.  So thank you.

         Okay.  Up next is the president's report, and I don't think I'm

    going to need 10 minutes.  As you know, a lot of what I wanted to do





    with the president's report, while I have it in my hands, is to

    celebrate things that we do in the classroom.

         So I will put it out there to all of you again, please tell me

    what you're doing in the classroom that's great, wonderful, cool,

    that you're just excited about, if you had a breakthrough recently in

    your division or department, share it.

         The point is we have a lot of other areas that celebrate on a

    regular basis, and we get to celebrate with them, and that's great.

    But we don't do it here enough ourselves.  So we really should do

    that.  I know that we are very humble people, but I do think that we

    need to be a little less humble and to celebrate.

         Anyway, all I have are two items to share this time, and I'm

    hoping that's going to grow exponentially next time.  You may not be

    aware, but we did just have, adult basic ed just had a high school

    equivalency virtual graduation on September 24.  We had quite a few

    members live who were able to attend the ceremony and even more who

    were attending virtually.  Families from around the country were also

    able to attend, and I thought that was great.

         I had a personal aspect of this, because I got to teach, for

    medical assisting, our certification program, I got to teach a

    medical terminology class last semester, and several of the students

    who were in that class graduated.  So that was just a great "woo"

    celebration for me.

         What I thought was really amazing, the students who were in that

    class then turned around and e-mailed me and told me what an impact I





    had, or, you know, they couldn't have gotten there without me.  You

    know, I thought, wow, that's amazing.  I taught one class.  They have

    11 classes they have to get through, and I taught one of them.  They

    were still willing to take time out of their day and e-mail me.  I

    thought, amazing.

         We do a lot, even if it's just one semester, one class, we still

    have such an impact on our students, and I think that needs to be

    celebrated.  So, everybody, clap for yourselves.

         I also wanted to share Molly Minke, she's one of our math faculty

    here at Northwest Campus, and she's amazing.  If you haven't met

    Molly, she's phenomenal, very student-centered, and I think that's

    great.

         She's part of this year's Chair Academy.  If you are not familiar

    the Chair Academy, the provost's report has some information on that,

    so I will refer you to that as a resource.

         Anyway, as part of the academy, cadets have to create something

    that is called an IPDP, which is an Individual Professional

    Developmental Plan.  I was part of the first Chair Academy, so I know

    personally what the IPDP is.  You have to select like three or four

    initiatives that you're going to work on in different areas.

         So one of the ones that Molly shared was that her objective was

    to develop a student math advisory committee in order to assist in

    improving mathematics instruction.  So she recruited 18 students from

    I do believe two or three different math areas, and they brainstormed

    with her on how to improve math instruction, what they felt was a





    struggle.  Maybe it was the way that the course was presented online

    or whatever.  You know, she said that they were very free-flowing

    with their feedback.

         Anyway, they provided feedback on electronic learning systems,

    textbooks, resources, OER, and with their feedback, she was able to

    come up with the resources and textbooks that are currently being

    used.  So she plans on doing this again in spring.  I think that's a

    wonderful idea.

         That's what I've got this time around.  So please help me fill up

    my 10 minutes by sharing all of the wonderful things that you do.

         Next up are our reports, so we have three reports, and I do

    believe the Governing Board report is up first with Denise Reilly.

         >> DENISE REILLY:  Thank you.  Well, this might be a shorter

    meeting then because a lot of what I planned talk about seemed to be

    discussed in depth right before this.

         The first Governing Board meeting was on the 8th of September and

    I believe the next one is next week, so there were some brief

    presentations about some awards that Pima received, the strategic

    planning team.  I will say that the most interesting thing is that it

    kind of felt like the board members, and all were present, it kind of

    felt like they came back after summer refreshed, you know, everybody

    comes back from vacation are excited to see each other.  It was

    almost like that.

         So the tone was very positive.  Maybe the summer retreat was

    amazing, I'm not sure.  But it did really seem positive.  They





    started out by giving a lot of positive remarks and compliments on

    PCC in general from specific departments, like maintenance and

    security to faculty to staff to students, really just congratulating

    everybody for getting through the worst part, what we think is the

    worst part about COVID, and coming back to the classroom.

         They did seem, I would say, very positive in general, so that was

    a nice, refreshing feeling.  It kind of felt like after you're on

    summer vacation and you come back excited to see your colleagues.

         There were some administrative reports, and probably the most

    lengthy and most robust one was from Dr. Dori focusing on enrollment

    and so many of the different initiatives that the college is working

    on to increase that enrollment.

         So talked about the strategic plan, all the different initiatives

    related to the centers of excellence, academics, any changes, dual

    enrollment, different partnerships, just basically a very robust

    summary of the next year or two, especially in terms of retooling and

    rethinking things.

         So I will say it:  It was pretty easy-going.  There wasn't much

    else.  It was actually the shortest board meeting I think I've ever

    gone to.  I'm not going to use that as my benchmark for the future,

    because I know what's to come, but I want to say it ended before 8:00

    at night, maybe even 7:30.  I was surprised.

         Probably the more interesting thing that occurred was when the

    Faculty Senate leadership met with administration, but a lot of that

    was discussed already with Tal and Ken, and the steering committee





    and the class and comp study.  Though we did talk about a few other

    things.  I think the biggest question asked by Dolores was what can

    we do as faculty to help retention.

         So kind of gathering some ideas and suggestions.  We gave a few

    suggestions, kind of went off on different tangents, everything from

    fixing the wait list to mask situations to everything else and just

    trying to get some more support with some of the systems that don't

    seem to function as well as they could.  So that was kind of

    something we talked about.

         Just like Rita had mentioned, and I don't want to steal your

    idea, Rita, but I have to follow along with what Brooke started with

    faculty notable accomplishments, and unfortunately was only able to

    add two, so thank you, Tim Cruz and Elliott, for being the mighty

    two.

         So I know it's difficult to talk about yourselves and the great

    things you're doing, and I also know travel has been suspended for

    some time.  Now it seems that things are ramping up.  I do see a lot

    of math faculty might be going to a conference next semester in the

    spring, so if you go to a conference, working on professional

    development, if you're working on your degree or if something else

    great comes up, please e-mail that.  I know that stuff will, you

    know, start coming up a little bit more with travel.  But it really

    would be nice.

         I did get to mention and talk about the TLC and the UnTeaching

    and UnLearning summit we talked about last time, but I was able to





    give a report about how many attended and how neat it was.  I thought

    it was a really cool experience, and there was a lot of feedback from

    that.  That was one accomplishment to share that I will be sharing

    this next week.

         As those things continue, I will probably just keep that in

    there, the TLC, in just a regular report about it.  If I don't get a

    lot in the next month or next few weeks before the next report, my

    next thought was to reach out to a lot of the faculty that advise

    clubs, because it is a lot of work.  Those of you who have taken a

    role in that area, it's pretty much a volunteer role for the most

    part and it's very time consuming.

         So if you advise a club and you're a faculty member or if you

    assist in any way, I might be reaching out to you the next few weeks

    to find out how is your club doing?  Those co-curricular events are

    just as important as all the committees we belong to, all the

    different groups we are looking at moving the needle forward with, so

    those out-of-class experiences are really, really important.  So I

    wanted to bring that up in the next faculty notable accomplishments.

         With that, I think I don't even really want to bring up anything

    else related to the faculty steering and class and comp, because that

    was already discussed here.  It was a pretty good summary by all

    those in attendance.  But we will continue with that.

         Probably the last thing I will say is I made a statement on

    behalf of Faculty Senate related to faculty pay, and I know that's

    just one component of this whole class and comp study.  There wasn't





    any comment by board members about that statement, so I'm willing to

    keep that on the radar and bring these things up.

         I want to be positive with everything that we are doing, and I

    want to be positive with our accomplishments.  However, I also want

    to be transparent and honest with the board as your board

    representative about how faculty are feeling about things and their

    questions and concerns.

         I'm glad they were brought forward here today, because that was

    part of the report.  I think Rita linked it to our agenda, so you can

    read the report.  But I think I summarized in an easy paragraph, you

    know, kind of some of the concerns that the steering committee had in

    relation to the class and comp.

         But I will continue to voice your concerns or opinions or

    thoughts, so let me know if you have any of those, as well as notable

    accomplishments.

         Thank you.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you, Denise.  Yeah, the statement is

    actually on our agenda, so you can read it fully.  Just a personal

    statement, not anything on behalf of faculty or Faculty Senate, I was

    quite disappointed.  It just seemed like you made the statement and

    Chair Clinco just went, okay, thank you.  That was really it.  I

    don't know.

         Anyway, moving on.  Our next report is Makyla with PCCEA report.

         >> MAKYLA HAYS:  So I was also going to start off with class and

    comp.  I didn't realize everybody was going to be in such detail.





    All I was going to say is basically that we started asking questions

    and we are hoping for those answers.  It was encouraging to hear what

    Dr. Bea had to say today, and I'm looking forward to seeing it and

    we'll see how it goes from there.  Hopefully we can get to share some

    things out soon with the blessing of the committees.

         Moving on quickly, the other group that I'm a part of is AERC, so

    I wanted to update you a bit on what AERC is doing, as well.

    Basically a process is being formed to create an ineligible for

    rehire list for adjunct faculty.  That sounds negative but it's not.

    This is created with adjunct faculty with the support of full-time

    faculty, and basically what we would like to do is department heads

    or those over adjunct faculty would be responsible for adding adjunct

    faculty to a list if they are not to be rehired.

         This would allow for, you know, an adjunct faculty not to be able

    to campus-hop if they aren't supposed to be rehired, but also it

    gives our adjunct faculty the ability to appeal a decision if they

    feel it's not an appropriate decision, if it's a personality conflict

    or something.  So it's a benefit for everyone.

         It just gives more transparency to the hiring process and makes

    sure that people aren't black-listed and have no way to answer to

    that as an adjunct faculty.

         This is also not an ineligible for rehire if there is not enough

    courses to give to people.  So this is just, you know, this is a

    separate process.

         But basically this process is being written up by AERC and will





    be going out for 21-day comment soon, and I just want to give you the

    heads-up to keep your eyes out, submit your feedback to that.  It is

    something department heads will kind of have to keep up with, but

    also shouldn't hopefully be much that we have to use it for.  So that

    is coming.

         Discussions are also still ongoing about remote work policies.

    There seems to be kind of a split between COVID remote work versus

    long-term remote work.  Discussions are going on about COVID-specific

    remote work policies.  Guidance should be coming out for faculty and

    other employees soon regarding remote work in the short term, what is

    three days on campus, two days off campus, what does that mean for

    faculty, and some other questions that we have heard.  So that should

    be coming out soon in the form of an FAQ to help clarify this policy.

         We also have several policies that were worked on in the last

    year that are not yet posted but should be posted soon.  They did go

    out for 21-day comment or they were just minor updates.  They haven't

    been posted to the website just yet, but they should be posted soon.

    When those are, we're going to try to keep an update list on our AERC

    website that Jamie Irvin has been great about trying to keep up for

    us.

         There is a Pima News blurb now as well that has a link to the

    website.  It's the word "online."  I noticed in the last Pima News, I

    didn't realize it was a link.  I knew there was one, so I just

    started clicking, and the word "online" was actually a link in the

    blurb to the AERC website.  So we may make that a little bit more





    clear on the next posting.

         Please use that link if you find anything with policy questions

    that isn't working well in your area or that you feel needs to be

    updated for your area.  The AERC welcomes those comments and we would

    love to push some faculty issues forward.

         Last, but not least, PCCEA has been talking about how to better

    represent faculty and get to all of our faculty.  So one of the

    things we have noticed is we are still very campus-based in our

    campus representatives, and our college has moved much more to

    division-based, and especially with COVID we haven't been on campus,

    so there is not as much chance to run into your reps.

         So we are going to be updating our bylaws to try to get some

    division representation so that we can just make sure that everybody

    has a way to contact PCCEA through their divisions.  So there will be

    a call for volunteers for those division reps once the bylaws are

    updated.

         We have a few vacant positions, so we will be calling for a

    special election for that.  Last, but not least, we are working on

    some new ways to connect with faculty through some different social

    media platforms, possibly Discord, and some other things that I'm

    really excited about the possibilities for keeping people updated and

    allowing you to get your input back to PCCEA.

         All of that to say I don't know the details yet, but updates will

    be coming soon.  So watch your e-mail, especially if you're a PCCEA

    member.  But even if you're not, I would love to hear from you and





    look forward to working with everybody.  Thanks for letting me do my

    first PCCEA report.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you, and welcome.  Well, I know you have

    been around, but welcome in this new role.

         I did fail to mention Michael Nolan had reached out to me on chat

    privately.  He does have an open-forum item, so he will be saying

    that after our reports.

         Our final report is the provost's report.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Thank you, Rita.  Hello, everyone.

    It's good to see you.  Happy Friday.  You all should have received

    the provost's report.  There will be some things that I will be

    updating and including on Monday when I send it out electronically to

    Pima All, including the new strategic plan.  I forgot to put it in

    this particular report.

         As you have seen, we have a lot of things going on, including

    Hispanic Heritage Month.  We have several activities that are taking

    place this month, September, and then up to October 15 or so.

         As Rita mentioned, last week I believe was the high school

    equivalency graduation.  I was supposed to be there to read names and

    shake hands and everything, but I got sick.  Food poisoning,

    unfortunately.

         The mayor, Regina Romero, she proclaimed September 19-25 as Adult

    Education and Literacy Week in Tucson, so we are really pleased about

    her support of adult education and literacy.

         As you probably know, we have vaccination sites this week at the





    various campuses, and from what I understand, we are getting a nice

    turnout of people.  Not only within the college, students and

    employees, but also community members.  So we are really pleased

    about that.  I think in three weeks they will make another cycle for

    the second shot.  Then we will go from there as far as booster shots

    once we get more information about that.  I think it's been working

    to help encourage folks to get the vaccine.

         Rita mentioned the Chair Academy and Molly Minke.  This is

    wonderful, Rita, you and Denise, are sharing faculty accomplishments.

    It's wonderful to hear what Molly has done with her students and

    getting feedback and applying that feedback to her courses directly

    for retention, which is an important topic.

         Denise mentioned that at the last board meeting enrollment was

    the presentation by Dr. Dori.  I will be following up, this October I

    will be presenting on persistence and retention.  Hopefully you guys

    can tune into that as well.

         Other things, I won't go everything in the packet, but on

    Thursday is the Rev it Up event at the Downtown Campus, and that's to

    bring students, employees, community members to take a look and tour

    of the new facilities there.  The centers of excellence is going to

    be live-streamed too.  I believe the mayor is going to be there as

    well as our chancellor, Mexican consul, and others.  So it's a time

    to celebrate the new facilities there for our centers of excellence.

         We also shared with you the library research award winners.  We

    are very happy to mention their names.  Samantha B, Collin Bryant,





    Desiree Garcia, Natasha C, Clinton M, and Lauren Redmond.  They all

    presented outstanding projects, and we are very happy to celebrate

    their accomplishments.

         Sabbaticals, the proposal deadline is October 18.  So if you're

    interested in that, please make sure to sign up for that.

         Finally, there is going to be the PimaOnline Educators Conference

    that's grown every year and has been highly successful.  It's October

    6 through 8, and if you can, I think it would be wonderful for you to

    participate.  I know it's mostly for online, but I think it's open

    for everybody.  It will be an excellent opportunity to network and to

    learn and share ideas for teaching and retention strategies.

         Then at the very end we have some information about the adjunct

    faculty collective.  I always like to include projects and activities

    that the adjunct faculty are doing, and Lisa Shumire (phonetic)

    usually contributes to this, and so we are very happy that that's

    included in the report, as well.

         So I think that pretty much covers it, and we are looking forward

    to seeing you at all these different events and activities, and thank

    you again for your hard work.

         I can't believe we are kind of in the middle of the semester.  It

    has gone very quickly, but thank you for your hard work.  I hope you

    get to enjoy the weather and the weekend.

         Thank you.  If you have any questions, please let me know.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you, Provost.  Matej, you have a question?

         >> MATEJ BOGUSZAK:  Yeah, thank you.  Thank you, Dolores.





         I had a question about the sabbaticals this year.  I heard some

    information that the college would possibly be only funding four

    sabbaticals next year, which is down from six, which is down from 12

    originally?

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Yes.  So the policy says up to 12,

    and we have, because of our budget situation and our enrollment

    decline really, it's very hard right now.  So we have been cutting a

    little bit down, but we didn't want to eliminate it completely,

    because we know it's such an important opportunity for faculty to

    explore, research, and projects and endeavors to help their own

    professional/personal growth.

         But this year, because of our enrollment decline and the COVID

    impacts that have had on the college as a whole, we didn't want to

    eliminate it, but we are offering four, but tying it to retention and

    enrollment strategies, like Molly's project.  I mean, everybody.

    You're all doing it in the classroom actively.  And so what are some

    more creative and innovative ways that you can add in your research

    that can tie and help the college.

         So it benefits you, as faculty, it benefits our students and the

    college because of all incredible ideas that you have and have been

    exploring with during COVID and before and potential ones in the

    future that can be shared in a project such as a sabbatical that's so

    important and can be relayed to other faculty as a learning

    experience.

         >> MATEJ BOGUSZAK:  Thank you.  So I understand, it's a





    cost-saving measure, and the enrollment, really, it's been

    heartbreaking.  We just saw our math schedule for the spring, and

    it's just down so much, again.

         So what I have a really hard time understanding is that if we are

    in a difficult budget situation, right, our expenditures on staff are

    up.  Our expenditures on contractors, these contracts and

    consultants, right, are up.  Our expenses on administration are

    almost where they were seven years ago and they are growing.

         The only place in terms of personnel where we have been cutting

    is full-time and adjunct faculty.  So could you help us understand,

    like, you know, this is an easy savings by cutting two sabbaticals

    again, and we are very grateful for this program, but what other

    savings measures is the college taking in other parts of the budget?

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  So it's not just looking at faculty.

    It is looking at the whole entire college where we can help as far as

    the budget is concerned.  So one is scheduling, streamlining the

    scheduling.

         So you'll notice perhaps differences in offering, being very

    strategic in what we offer and the times that we offer, too, because

    the students are saying that, as we know because of COVID, a lot of

    our students who the average age is 27 and they have families, 74% of

    them are part-time students.

         So they need the time to work as well as take classes, so we need

    to expand our schedules into the evenings and weekends.  Earlier in

    the mornings, too.  Like I said, being strategic in offering what we





    offer and how we offer.

         We thought, because students had said they wanted face-to-face,

    so we offered 30% this semester face-to-face, and I think because of

    the Delta variant and them having to make choices about working and

    continuing to work rather than to continue their studies -- and this

    is nationwide, as we know.  It's not just Pima.  We see it in

    Maricopa and other institutions.  Fortunately for the universities,

    like University of Arizona, their enrollment went up, but it's a lot

    of, it's out-of-state.

         But anyway, all of these factors, the birth dearth, the COVID

    impacts, all of this is affecting the college and colleges, so we are

    trying to be strategic in what we can do to shift things.

         So that means looking at not only the scheduling but looking at

    the programs that we offer, revamping the curriculum so they are more

    relevant and we can attract more students to join.

         So it's a little bit of components all over, and it's not -- as

    you know, I come from faculty, and I appreciate and I always keep

    that hat on, but it's not just looking at faculty cuts or potential

    cuts.  It's looking at the entire college.  Programs, staff,

    everything, because we do -- because of enrollment, we are really

    overstaffed, and looking at how we can use the space, spaces at the

    campuses.

         I know the chancellor and the board really, they don't want to

    close a campus, but maybe looking at partnerships and leasing out.  I

    know District is still on the table for moving us to a campus.  I





    would really personally love that, because I miss the heart of the

    college, which is being on the campuses.

         So it's a complex issue.  It's taking time, but we want to

    maintain that vitality and insights the faculty have, so keeping up

    the sabbatical program is personally very important.  The last

    year -- remember how there was a pause and they weren't offering any

    sabbaticals?  Several years ago when I was a faculty and the time I

    wanted to apply, I couldn't anymore, and then I went into

    administration.  But I know the value of it, so that's why I insisted

    that we keep it.

         But we have to work together in how we can fix and help the

    budget impacts because of COVID, birth dearth, and how we can help

    our students with economic development.

         But it is hard, and it's not going to be an easy future for Pima

    or for the nation's community colleges as a whole.

         >> MATEJ BOGUSZAK:  Thank you.  I just -- we are not making the

    same kinds of cuts in other areas other than faculty.  I just do not

    understand this.

         If enrollment is down so much, that burden should be shared more

    widely.  I'm afraid we are not investing in our core mission enough.

    I know it's not just you, I don't want to put you on the spot, but I

    wanted to share this perspective.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  I appreciate that and I will relay

    the message, too.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.  Sarah?





         >> SARAH JANSEN:  I think I just have a bit of a follow-up on

    what, Dolores, you were saying and Matej was saying.  This question

    about retention and who contributes the most to retention at the

    college I think is an important one.  I also don't think it's one

    that necessarily see people making research-based decisions on.

         I know this is kind of a little bit like anecdotal, but I did sit

    in on one of the board meetings a while back, and some of the board

    members' remarks that, oh, the folks who retain students, those are

    our advisors.  That's just obvious, with no research to back that

    decision.  It just struck me as very odd as a faculty member, like,

    you're making hiring decisions on the basis of these opinions that

    don't have any research backing.

         I'm concerned, because I would also think that faculty contribute

    a lot to retention, as well.  Just kind of my two cents on that.

         Following up on your statement about you would like sabbaticals,

    research during sabbaticals to relate to this question of retention,

    but is there an assumption in the background there that we are not

    contributing to retention in our --

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  No.  I don't.  And I don't think

    -- my team does absolutely not, and the college.  Because we have

    been talking specifically about retention, and of course program

    advisors, counselors have a vital, crucial, critical role with our

    students, but faculty are in the classroom every day with students.

         They are advisors.  Faculty are advisors.  I felt I was an

    advisor as a faculty member, and that's the retention piece.  You





    advise and you guide them as to, for example, what's the next

    sequence of a class you need to take.  We are talking about career

    options or just helping them to understand the material, tutoring,

    for example, or guiding them to the right resources, if they have a

    question regarding scheduling, to go to the right person.  So you

    connect them.  You are the liaison between the student and their

    goals.

         So faculty advising for me is key to retention and the way you

    engage with students in the classroom in addition to the important

    role of program advisor.  Student Life, creating that sense of

    belonging for students too.  Especially now during this COVID era

    that we were virtual and online, how do you create that sense of

    belonging and networking and support that students feel with each

    other?  But I know that Student Life coordinators created multiple

    events, the clubs, the faculty advisors, as Denise talked about with

    the clubs, that's key too.

         So it's a group collective effort.  But I personally, and I know

    others, see that faculty are a key part of that as advisors.

         >> SARAH JANSEN:  Thank you.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  You're welcome.  Any other

    questions?

         >> RITA LENNON:  Three more.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Okay, great.

         >> KEN SCOTT:  Completely unrelated to what we have already been

    talking about, two questions.  One, we talked a year ago about fall





    break, and you said you were going to think about it.  I bounced the

    idea off students, and students really like the idea.

         I have no idea how we'd make that work with the schedule at the

    University of Arizona and everything else, I have no idea, but I

    promised students I'd bring it back up.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  I'm glad you did.  I'm sorry I have

    not followed up on it.  How many days is it in the school districts,

    fall break?

         >> RITA LENNON:  One week.  Five days.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  One full week?

         >> RITA LENNON:  Most districts will add on a couple of half days

    in the beginning.  So it's fun (smiling).

         >> KEN SCOTT:  I don't think we will be able to swing half days,

    but just to give students that psychological break like we do in the

    spring.  I realize that would probably mean we'd have to work a week

    later --

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  In the summer, uh-huh.

         >> KEN SCOTT:  The holidays...

         >> RITA LENNON:  And Matej brought this up.  We do have an

    academic calendar committee, so that would definitely need to be in

    discussion with them.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Absolutely.  Sorry, Ken, I did not

    follow up on that.  Thank you for bringing it up again.  Academic

    calendar -- Aubrey, are you still here?

         >> KEN SCOTT:  I understand if you have been busy.  I seem to





    remember reading something in the news about a pandemic.  (Laughter.)

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  You all have been busy too.

         >> This is Nancy.  I'm on the academic calendar committee.  I

    just put a comment in there.  If a decision is made about it, it

    needs to be made quickly, because we work way ahead.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Yeah, you do.

         >> There are a lot of moving pieces.

         >> KEN SCOTT:  Oh, I'm sure.

         >> DR. LAMATA MITCHELL:  Nancy is correct.  And Nina is my

    representative as the co-chair, along with Elvia on that committee,

    and I think Michael Tulino is on this call.

         >> RITA LENNON:  He had to leave, so he's not here any longer.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  But, Lamata, let's take that up with

    Nina and Elvia to discuss it in the academic calendar committee.

         >> DR. LAMATA MITCHELL:  Sounds good.

         >> KEN SCOTT:  And my follow-up question, so like I put in the

    comment area, I have got a classroom, pre-COVID, I've got 40 chairs,

    that class would be full.  Additional students wanting to sit in the

    back with laptops.  This term, I've got like six students because

    they are all online.  So we are offering twice as many -- well,

    online and virtual.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Virtual.

         >> KEN SCOTT:  Virtual is just kind of like a morphed in-person,

    and I'm very clear that has nothing to do with online.  We do meet,

    everything else.





         So since this is, kind of seems like where a lot of the students

    want to go, but one of the big concerns I have heard from students

    when I have been asking them in the classroom, you know, why wasn't

    virtual working for you?  Like, well, I don't have a quiet location

    that I can work.  I'm distracted by everything.

         So my question is since we have all this empty, unused space

    presently, if we are going to continue in this fashion and if we're

    going to continue to offer virtual classes, which do seem to be a big

    hit with the students and it's working, could we convert some of that

    space into, I don't know, like a silo kind of thing so students can

    come in and have their own flat work space and a quiet area,

    plexiglass --

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  That's an excellent idea.  I know

    other institutions have been doing that.

         Dr. Dori, are you still here as president of campuses?  Is this

    something you can take up with the campus VPs?  Or if a campus VP is

    here?  If not, I'll take it -- I know he was here before.

         >> RITA LENNON:  He was.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  I think that's an excellent idea,

    and we actually thought about that last semester or last year about

    opening up spaces.  I think some of the campuses did, but that was

    when everything was sealed and we didn't have the plexiglass yet.

         But I think that's an excellent idea.  I know some students,

    there are multiple generations living in the same household and it's

    hard to focus sometimes.





         Thank you for mentioning that, and I will take that up with Dr.

    Dori.

         >> KEN SCOTT:  Thank you very much.  If I can help in any way,

    please let me know.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Okay.  Absolutely.  Thank you.

         >> KEN SCOTT:  Thank you.

         >> RITA LENNON:  We do have two more questions, and we are going

    to leave it at that so we can move on with our meeting.  Makyla?

         >> MAKYLA HAYS:  So mine was piggy-backing off of Matej's a

    little bit with sabbaticals.  My concern when I heard about the

    sabbatical request was the change in focus, not because of what

    you're changing the focus to.  I get retention, recruitment, all

    that, is a big idea.  But the timing of it, people have been working

    on their sabbatical proposals for quite a while, and it feels like

    changing the timing at this point when they are almost due -- I know

    you have worked out to where you add a paragraph or something and the

    committee will look at it, but it seems a bit like moving the

    goalpost, and I'm concerned about changing it for this year, because

    people have been working on their sabbatical proposals for quite a

    while.  To change it at this point feels like more work for

    everybody.

         I'm worried.  You make a lot of things sound good.  I'm worried

    you're not going to get what you want out of it and they are not

    going to get what they want out of it, and that it's going to lessen

    the quality of the sabbaticals that are actually going to be approved





    in terms of forcing a square peg into a round hole.

         I'm concerned about making the requirement of the sabbatical

    change at this point in time to really be able to put in a good

    thought and to make it actually do what you want it to do for the

    college.

         Again, not a bad goal.  I'm just concerned about timing.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Well, that's a good question.  Thank

    you for bringing up your concern about it.  From what I understand,

    there has been a lot of conversation within sabbatical committee.  I

    think, Kate, I think you're on the call.  Can you maybe elaborate...

         >> KATE SCHMIDT:  Can you still hear me?  I don't know that's

    been brought to the committee, but the two chairs of the committee

    and I have had a conversation about it.  It has always been a

    requirement, I think it's 40% of the rubric has to look at the

    benefit to the self, benefit to the students, and benefit to the

    college.  So this is just giving a little bit more definition to the

    benefit to the college.

         We went through recent proposals from previous years to sort of

    see how many of these, could you connect enrollment and retention to

    these.  We really couldn't find a proposal that didn't already have

    some connection to enrollment and retention.  So really, I think this

    is about just an awareness and making sure we work, with the

    activities people are doing, I don't think there is any expectation

    that if somebody has already started working on something that it's

    not about changing their direction but about giving it a little bit





    of extra thought about how that might benefit enrollment and

    retention.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Thank you, Kate.

         Does that help, Makyla?

         >> MAKYLA HAYS:  Yes and no.  I get it.  I think it might sell

    better to outside people potentially.  I don't know if that's what

    it's going for.

         I just worry that -- it sounds like it's not an extra filter, but

    yet when it's presented, it sounds like an extra filter, if that

    makes sense.

         When it's being presented, it sounds like an extra requirement.

    If we did that to our students, we would be crucified, you know.

    There would be complaints.  My teacher changed the assignment right

    before it was due, and, you know, my expectations weren't clear at

    the outset, this is a horrible teacher.  Like that's kind of the

    feedback that I would expect to hear if I changed it.

         And I get it's not changing it greatly, but it is a change still

    and I'm concerned about doing it at this time point in the timeline.

    I feel like it should have been quite a bit -- honestly, that concern

    came to me from people on the committee.  It's not super clear to

    those that have even been evaluating the proposals that this is not

    an extra requirement.  That's my feedback.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Okay.  Thank you for sharing that.

    We'll go back to the committee chairs and discuss it a little further

    of how we can fine-tune it or revisit it.  Thank you.





         >> MAKYLA HAYS:  Or if possible just make it for next year.  I

    know what you're going for, but I really feel at this point, because

    they are due really soon, and so maybe even just making it for next

    time, the next cycle, so that people are well aware in advance, so

    you actually get what you want out of the sabbatical as well

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Good point.  I will reflect on that.

    Thank you.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Nancy?

         >> My question is about advising and retention.  I'm very

    concerned -- I mean, we want to retain students, we want to recruit

    new students, but there have been changes in advising this year that

    evidently due to the pandemic, I'm not sure, we had two advisors who

    were trained in ESL, they were both sent to the Northwest Campus

    where we have no ESL students.

         There was nobody left at Downtown who has the expertise in

    working with second-language students.  It's all gone back to online,

    you've got to be computer-savvy to register for classes, to enroll in

    the college.  It's basically all gone online again.

         Our students struggle so much with that, and it seems to me we

    are putting more roadblocks in the students by going back to the

    online advising and registration.

         >> DR. DOLORES DURAN-CERDA:  Thank you, Nancy.

         I think, Irene, are you on the call?  I think I saw you.

         >> DR. IRENE ROBLES-LOPEZ:  Thank you so much for that question

    and that concern.  So what we did is back in July we ended up coming





    back to the campuses to offer face-to-face services.  We absolutely

    understand that we do have a group of students, a population of

    students that prefer face-to-face.

         So we are offering face-to-face services at every single campus.

    Again, we picked the days, the hours of the day when we know that

    students are more likely to come in, when we were offering classes,

    when students may need assistance.

         Now, we still have virtual services available, as well, to

    augment the face-to-face, but a student can get help with

    registering, getting questions answered, whatever assistance they

    need in person at any campus.

         Then, for example, if we have an advisor that maybe is located at

    one campus and the student walks into, I don't know, let's say, for

    example, Downtown Campus, we can schedule an appointment for that

    student with that specific advisor at a specific day and time.  They

    can also do that even via Google Meet.  That way they are not having

    to physically travel to a different location.

         So we really have tried to meet the very needs of students,

    because we know that for some students virtual works well and then

    for others really the preference is face-to-face.

         >> Yeah, and I guess my concern is for ESL students, the people

    that were trained in ESL and helping specifically ESL students, they

    are not at Downtown where everybody goes, and again, that's either

    they have to make another trip back to the campus or go up to

    Northwest Campus or they have to have the technology skills to go to





    Google Meet.

         >> DR. IRENE ROBLES-LOPEZ:  Well, we are on campus to help them

    with all of that, so we don't turn students away and say, okay,

    you're going to have to come back to get assistance.  We will try to

    connect students with the assistance that they need right then and

    there.

         I can get, also, because our directors are the ones that oversee

    the program advisors based on division, so we can absolutely have

    this conversation as a follow-up to look to see what the concerns are

    and how we can address them.

         Yeah, we can absolutely talk about that.

         >> Okay.  Thank you, Irene.

         >> DR. IRENE ROBLES-LOPEZ:  Sure, of course.  Thank you.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.  So many good things.  Want to have

    like another hour and a half of conversation, but I don't think that

    would be a popular choice.

         I do want to honor the fact that we did have an open forum

    request.  Michael, if you wouldn't mind bringing your conversation to

    light?

         >> MICHAEL NOLAN:  Thanks, Rita.  Good afternoon, everybody.  I

    appreciate the last-minute offer.  Sorry I didn't put it in earlier.

    My technology is not so good sometimes, or maybe that's just me.

         I wanted to, kind of piggybacking on what we were talking about,

    retention and faculty input.  In the arts division, I have heard from

    virtually all of my fellow faculty that we are having some





    frustration with spring scheduling.  This is kind of more or less a

    fact-finding mission on my part to what else is going on.  So far

    some of the questions have been answered by Dolores and Matej.

         But normally, we have quite a bit of input in terms of the

    scheduling so we can help do what's best for the students and so

    forth.  This is probably my first term here in the last ten years

    where we have had zero input for the scheduling.  The fellow faculty

    are having quite a few frustrations to that, and we are not being

    heard at all.

         We are getting frustration, and we understand obviously due to

    the low enrollment, I believe the enrollment is at the lowest point

    since 1980, correct me if I'm wrong, it's been a really tough time

    for everybody and we are obviously trying to make concessions and do

    what's best for the college, students, and community, but we are

    running into conflicts where, depending how the data is rolled out,

    which we haven't really seen, and we are just kind of expressing some

    more transparency, for instance, teachers that have normally taught

    classes where we want to put, most of the departments we want to put

    the best teachers in the best classes at the right time were having

    conflict where, say, a teacher had taught four classes in a normal

    semester for quite some time, and then this semester all of a sudden

    the classes are at the same time, and they are only able to teach two

    of them.

         Normally we try to have some type of input to help correct that,

    and it doesn't seem like we are able to get any of that through.





         Anyway, I just wanted to bring it up and wanted to know what else

    is happening in terms of the college, if we were alone on that, or

    just kind of what our possibilities are and kind of just making a

    discussion.  I appreciate it.

         >> DR. LAMATA MITCHELL:  Michael, thank you for bringing that

    concern forward.  My directive to the deans for the spring schedule

    was to look at not just enrollment numbers but to look at the

    completion numbers and to stand back and do a college-wide view of

    what is being offered so we can see where there are overlaps, we can

    see where there are gaps, and do we need to move some of the sections

    because they are congested on one particular campus or in a

    particular time slot so that our students are not limited to 10:00

    through 12:00 to find whatever classes they need.

         And then I asked the deans, once they stood back and looked at

    that and removed the sections that had extremely low enrollment, and

    I'm talking about enrollment in single digits, that they were to

    bring in their department heads and talk about what they saw and work

    together on the schedule.

         What I asked them not to do this time was to just turn over the

    schedule to the department heads without having a conversation with

    them about what the goal is for each division and where the needs

    are, because in some situations, I had noticed that certain programs

    had courses that they said were only available in the spring, but

    they did not appear on the spring schedule.

         So I wanted as many eyes on possible on the schedule before it





    goes live.  What I'm trying to mitigate is these last-minute changes

    that happens just before the semester starts but the schedule is

    already live and students have already enrolled.  Because it really

    is problematic to then close the class down, remove the students,

    correct it, and put them back in, because within that space of

    closing it down, making the correction, we lose students and they

    just don't come back.

         So that was what I requested of all of the deans.  I'm sorry that

    you were not pulled in earlier than that.  I will be looking at the

    schedule this week, because it has to -- it goes live I think on the

    8th of the month, to look at that college-wide offering so that we

    bear in mind that 74% of our students are part-time and so they are

    not all available between 10:00 and 2:00.  We need to have some

    offerings for them in the evenings, we need to have some offerings

    for them over the weekend if the program's enrollment leans to that

    and that is what the students say would work best for them.

         Unfortunately, because of the enrollment, we have been told that

    we can't be everywhere at all times.  So we have to negotiate what

    does that look like, where are we needed the most so that we don't

    slow students down in their progress throughout their educational

    journey.

         But I will continue that conversation with the deans to see where

    things fell apart.

         >> MICHAEL NOLAN:  Thank you, Lamata.  That was wonderful.  That

    was what I was kind of searching for.  Again, we are really happy and





    eager to help in the art department, and we want to work with the

    ultimate goal, and that's what hopefully I expressed today.  I just

    was trying to communicate that my fellow faculty didn't feel like

    they were being heard too much about it.  We are welcome to work

    wherever we can.

         >> DR. LAMATA MITCHELL:  Thank you for bringing that to my

    attention.  I appreciate it.

         >> MICHAEL NOLAN:  Thank you.  I appreciate it.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.  Actually, that wasn't just a

    singular area of the college that was facing this.  So, Lamata, I do

    appreciate you being here.  I had asked to have this actually on our

    agenda.  You know, Lamata works with a group of faculty on this, and

    she wanted to get back to the faculty one more time before we brought

    this up in senate.

         So hopefully we will have more information.  I do believe their

    next meeting is the 14th, if I'm remembering correctly, so hopefully

    in November we'll be able to have more data on this and more

    information presented at that meeting.

         >> DR. LAMATA MITCHELL:  Rita, are you referring to the

    cross-listed?

         >> RITA LENNON:  No, not the cross-listing so much but the

    virtual offerings.  You know, it seemed like there were requests

    across several different departments or divisions to limit the amount

    of virtual.

         Definitely don't want to start a conversation two minutes after





    our time, but I just wanted to let you know that this was something

    we are aware of and we will have more information in our November

    meeting about it.

         >> DR. LAMATA MITCHELL:  I think perhaps in some areas, and this

    was up to the deans, the attention to perhaps pulling back on the

    virtual, number of virtual sections that are offered, was based on

    what they were hearing back from students.  Students are saying we

    want to be back on the campus, we want to be in the classroom, but we

    have seen from this semester that they didn't do that.

         Some areas have pointed out to me that their success rate was not

    high for virtual and online, and so they felt that they needed to go

    back to their normal face-to-face offerings so that they have that

    physical contact with the students to keep them moving along.

         But I will be happy to talk about that in more detail at your

    next meeting.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.  That would be a very good aspect of

    the conversation, for sure.  We appreciate that.

         I do believe that we have reached the end.  You know, I do

    apologize.  Part of the agenda was missing, so I didn't ask, but I

    didn't know if anybody wanted executive session.  If so, go ahead and

    say so now, and we will see how many senators are able to stay.

         However, we have reached the end of our agenda, and I'm going to

    be quiet for a moment just to see if there are any requests for

    executive session.

         Okay.  Having not heard nor seen anything in chat -- nope.





         >> KEN SCOTT:  I think Raymond just raised his hand.

         >> RITA LENNON:  So sorry.  Raymond, hello.  You're appearing

    now.

         >> RAYMOND:  I had tried to send you a direct message earlier

    requesting executive session.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you so much.  We will definitely stay in

    for executive session.

         Senators, if you can, you don't have anything else pressing to go

    to, please stay for executive session.  That will conclude our

    current and main meeting.  But to conclude it, I do need to hear

    something.  A motion?

         >> MATEJ BOGUSZAK:  Move to adjourn.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Thank you.  Maybe only certain people can say

    that.  Thank you.

         >> I second it, if I can figure out how to unmute myself.

         >> RITA LENNON:  Tal and Mary second it.  Great.  Go ahead and

    say aye.  Thank you so much.  We will go ahead and ask guests, staff,

    and nonfaculty senators to exit the building.

         (Adjournment.)





                         *********************************************

                DISCLAIMER: THIS CART FILE WAS PRODUCED FOR COMMUNICATION

    ACCESS AS AN ADA ACCOMMODATION AND MAY NOT BE 100% VERBATIM. THIS IS

    A DRAFT FILE AND HAS NOT BEEN PROOFREAD. IT IS SCAN-EDITED ONLY, AS

    PER CART INDUSTRY STANDARDS, AND MAY CONTAIN SOME PHONETICALLY

    REPRESENTED WORDS, INCORRECT SPELLINGS, TRANSMISSION ERRORS, AND

    STENOTYPE SYMBOLS OR NONSENSICAL WORDS. THIS IS NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT

    AND MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED, PRIVILEGED OR CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.

             THIS FILE SHALL NOT BE DISCLOSED IN ANY FORM (WRITTEN OR

    ELECTRONIC) AS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OR POSTED TO ANY WEBSITE OR

    PUBLIC FORUM OR SHARED WITHOUT THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE

    HIRING PARTY AND/OR THE CART PROVIDER. THIS IS NOT AN OFFICIAL

    TRANSCRIPT AND SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON FOR PURPOSES OF VERBATIM

    CITATION.

                     *********************************************