Friday, September 19, 2003
PRESENT: Kate Acks, Pat Adams, Eric Arquero, Scott Broadbent, Kathryn Fletcher, Sharane Gomes for Vaughn Baker, Robyn Klein, Bev Lashley, Paul Levinson, Marge Kelm, Diane Meyer, Karen Muraoka/Liane Pena-Araki, Wallette Pellegrino, Jeannie Pezzoli, Suzette Robinson, Clyde Sakamoto, Alvin Tagomori, David Tamanaha
EXCUSED: Marvin Tengan, flo wiger
GUESTS: Dan Kruse (Strategic Plan)
Elena Alexander, Katie Barry (Student Activities)
The Western Association of Schools and Colleges has reduced its ten standards for accreditation to four new standards. They will be reviewing the quality and focus of dialogue in campus meetings. Dialogues may be focused on many and different issues but all of them should support student learning outcomes and connect with our data analyses and resource allocations.
The committee discussed the dialogue concept and definition introduced by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges.
1. Broadbased representation
· Insure that there is broad-based representation at the table or represented in different forums.
· Include and design meeting opportunities for people to feel comfortable enough to express whatever viewpoint and perspective they may have.
· Assure comprehensive dialoguing and in multiple settings, i.e. units, division, community.
· Possibly identify a UPW (Unit 1) and an Academic Support representative to the Admin/Executive Committee.
· Representatives should be regularly soliciting their respective groups for input to the Admin/Executive Committee.
· Clerical staff could form a clerical council. A representative from the council could attend the Academic Senate and Executive meetings to voice clerical staff concerns.
· Clerical and APT staff meetings with the Chancellor will continue.
· Must have some mechanism to show evidence that discussions, dialogue, decisions, etc. have occurred as a result of data, participation, and resource allocations.
· Must record key discussion points and move from the conceptual to the actual implementation of campus directions, e.g., strategic plan.
· Assess the need for an overall information strategy to identify, store, gather, disseminate, analyze, etc.
. Gather all information together into one web site.
. . Assemble all information in a logical fashion.
· Examine the value of a facilitator to assist with meetings.
· Provide evidence that we are not simply meeting but that we are achieving our mission and our priorities.
3. Continuous (just in time) focused, multiple settings
· Discussions should have a purpose/focus, not just a response to an immediate problem.
· Dialogue should be ongoing.
4. Focused on Strategic Plan (keep system in mind)
· Discussions should address the mission, goals, objectives, and priorities of our Strategic Plan
· Need to dialogue with system as MCC will be held accountable for system decisions.
5. Building the collective intelligence
· Expanding and sharing the collective discussion of the group will occur through dialogues.
· This process will address communication issues including interaction among units, programs, outreach centers and campus, etc..
6. Provide evidence dialogue took place (web, email, unit notes, meetings with clerical staff); attendance, one topic, facilitator
· Requires agenda, notes, and list of participants for all discussions. All notes/minutes should be available via email and put on the web.
. Emphasize to campus that this is how we will be communicating
. Show evidence that we made information “available” to everyone; folks are responsible for retrieving information via email or the web.
7. (Data) Information availability (accessibility) – structure for dissemination
(examine campus website)
· Suggest hiring a web master. Computing Center, Institutional Support, and RDP are already looking at the possibility of bringing a web master on board.
· Examine helpfulness of setting up a web page to open automatically and to have web site address for relevant info and data included in email sent.
· Banner will have email, calendar, job placement and other features for students. With the email feature, faculty can send email to classes so students can be informed. WebCT will be added in the Spring.
1. Criteria for cutting classes, adding classes
· Pat distributed copies of the criteria and asked members to let her know if there were any additions.
· Eric was asked to have student government look at the criteria and return with responses at the next Admin/Executive Committee meeting.
2. Overall budget revisions
The Governor has lifted the budget restrictions. David Tamanaha distributed information on the current budget reflecting restored funds, special funds cash balances, and a history of general funds and tuition and fees expenditures for FY2000 to FY 2004. UH Foundation Program Accounts information was also distributed.
· Need to systematically look at special funds cash balances as many are in deficit.
· With the restriction lifted, we will have a projected carry-over balance of $292,266. $110,000 will be kept in reserve for emergencies and/or to pre-purchase supplies for the next fiscal year.
· Budget information should be put on website for all to see. Actual figures, versus current figures should be explained.
· It was requested that we research how we may be able to have tuition and fees funds returned to the unit that generates the income through offering a high demand class.
3. Immediate proposals for spring budget.
· With the restriction lifted, we may allocate approximately $170,000, beginning with spring scheduling.
· Assess the implications of 5 to 4 collective bargaining class adjustments.
· Restore positions, i.e. full-time, student help (attach #’s, amounts, where student help will be assigned), faculty, staff.
· Warm bodies considered for reduction because of budget restrictions should be reinstated.
4. Upgrade clerical positions (attach #’s, amounts)
5. Academic Support and instructional supplies
· Supplies and infrastructure
· Upgrading rooms, that require newer machines and software
Clyde has asked Jeannie to prepare data for the next Admin/Executive Committee meeting: all relevant data for Spring ’02 and ’03 semesters and campus decision making. Program Health Indicators and data on majors distributed.
Recommended that the campus should be informed of the proposed overall decision making process It should be emphasized that this process should start now in order to prepare for the ’96 accreditation visit.
A special admin/exec meeting to continue this discussion is scheduled for Monday, September 29, 2003, 8:30 a.m. in Ka Lama 102.
STUDENT ACTIVITIES FEES
Elena Alexander, Student Activities Coordinator; Eric Arquero, Student Government Chairperson; and Katie Barry, Student Government Vice-Chairperson, presented a proposal to increase student fees to a flat rate of $10. The increase will be comparable to the other community college campuses. The committee agreed that an increase is necessary to support the activities that Student Government has been sponsoring. They asked Katie to look at alternative ways to raise the fee, i.e. per credit fee with a cap rather than a flat fee. Katie was also asked to include a listing of activities that the additional funds would support.
· Catalog/Schedule of Classes
The committee agreed to have 3,000 copies printed for $10,500 versus 2,000 copies for $9,000.
· The committee agreed to have 12,000, 40-page copies printed and to keep all information in. Pat will double check on the $7,472. 63,000 copies of another campus publication were printed for $16,662.
· Committee members were reminded that the upper campus parking lot (in front of the Science building and hales) will be closed on October 2 for the County Fair parade.
· Marge Kelm noted that Dan Kruse was invited to attend the Executive Committee meeting because he plays a crucial role in the strategic planning process. Dan will be invited back to help guide the committee’s conversations.
· The Centennial Campaign proposals for foundation funds may need to be revisited.
Committee members were asked to complete an evaluation on the meeting process.