3‐12‐13 Senate Meeting Documents President’s Report/Announcements 1. Our accreditation site visit is scheduled for March 18‐21, 2013. If you have yet to read the Pirate’s Treasure Map, I would recommend that you do so. It’s important for us to read it b/c the site team may be dropping in on your office hours or your classroom, in an effort to verify the information that have included in our self evaluation. You can find the Pirate’s Treasure Map and other useful information at the college’s accreditation site. Here is the link: http://www.orangecoastcollege.edu/about_occ/Accreditation/Pages/2013‐ACCJC‐Visit.aspx. 2. Please keep in mind the following senate rules based on Robert’s Rules of Order and our one‐hour meeting time: a. Please keep your comments to one minute or less. Several senators and guests want to speak, and it is important that we be concise during a one‐hour meeting. b. Please do not be offended if I do not call on you. If you’ve spoken once and raise your hand again, I will call on those who have yet to speak before I call on those who have already spoken. Sometimes I make mistakes, as well. Please know they are not intentional. c. Please follow proper protocol. Remember to raise your hand. While being too formal can be stifling, it is especially important when we have strict time restrictions on our debates and discussions. 3. What do you think about the three annual priorities for the 2013‐2014 academic year? Student Success, Internationalization, and Professional Development. Let me or one of the other three senate reps on college council know (Rodney Foster, Brian Gould, and Robin O’Connor). We will be discussing and voting on this at the next college council meeting. 4. As part of the student success initiative, the state is seeking input on new professional development guidelines that will be going before the Board of Governors in the summer. The recommendations will require community colleges to adopt at least 5 professional development days (at our district, we currently have 0). Please read through the recommendations and e‐mail to me your feedback. Here is the link: http://extranet.cccco.edu/Portals/1/AA/SummerSummits/PDCRecommendationsv8.pdf. 5. The nomination period for Department Chairs is open until March 15, 2013. You should have received the job descriptions from your Division Dean in the last day or two. Per the instructions on the job description, please SELF‐ NOMINATE via e‐mail to me, Allison Paine, and your division senator by the deadline. We are using a process of self‐ nomination, so that our office does not have to confirm nominations made by others.

Action Items A. Unfinished Business 1. Nominations and election of Full‐Time Senators‐at‐Large—we have five vacancies and thus far only one nominee. It is difficult to maintain faculty primacy in the ten plus one without faculty participation. PLEASE encourage your colleagues to come forward. We will close the nominations at our March 19th meeting and then conduct elections at the same meeting.

2. REVISED MOOC Resolution—S13‐01—moved by Senator Arismendi‐Pardi and seconded by Senator Kennedy. Whereas, ASCCC President Michelle Pilati raised serious academic and proprietary concerns about MOOCs and has stated appropriate caution is warranted;

Whereas, MOOC lectures are “canned,” quizzes and testing automated, and students participation is voluntary, students get little help from faculty; regular and substantive interaction is severely limited; and student‐faculty relationships that build a foundation of student growth and learning are minimal to absent;

1

Whereas, is committed to student‐faculty relationships that build a foundation of student growth and learning; the college slogan is “We’ll help you get there”; our Institutional Commitment states that “We value teaching and learning relationships” with our students;

Whereas, the ACCJC’s standards for distance education include “regular and substantive interaction” with students and the ACCJC is currently examining and visiting our online courses to ensure we meet those standards;

Whereas, the MOOCs instructional paradigm works best for a very small portion of self‐directed learners as only 5% of students complete courses and a smaller subset pass;

Whereas, implementation of MOOCs without collegial consultation from the faculty presents a threat to shared governance and academic freedom;

Whereas, copyright clearance and intellectual property (IP) can be costly and institutions bear these responsibilities for clearing copyright and copyright violations when they partner with commercial MOOC providers;

Whereas, the AS at City College (SDCC) passed a resolution proposing that MOOCs must go through a deliberate curriculum review process and such courses are “teacherless classrooms” that undermine academic integrity and rigor and as a consequence San Diego Community College District (SDCCD) Chancellor Constance Carroll declared a one‐year moratorium on MOOCs while a task force is created to investigate the appropriateness of this new form of instruction;

Be it Resolved that the CCCD form a task force of faculty members appointed by each of the academic senates to investigate the appropriateness of MOOCs at the CCCD and to ensure that we proceed with knowledge and caution through a collegial consultation process. (someone had also mentioned working with the Dean of Students office?)

Be it Further Resolved, that the task force work closely with CFE on the particulars of MOOCs as they directly relate to wages, working conditions and IP;

Be it Further Resolved, that the task force develop a report following the task force investigation to be presented to the CCCD BOT;

Be it Finally Resolved, that if the findings from the investigation by the task force are favorable then, and only then, a pilot program test be developed for evaluating MOOCs and that the findings be based on formative criteria, summative evaluation, and if appropriate, include qualitative and quantitative measurements and assessments. References Auletta, K. (2012, April 30). Get rich u: There are no walls between Stanford and Silicon Valley. Should there be? The New Yorker. Retrieve fromhttp:www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/04/30/120430fa_fact_auletta?print able=true

Cost, J., Miller, J., McLoad, J., St. George, M, Haro, P., Mahler, J. (2013, January 14). Essay says faculty involved in MOOCs may be making rope for professional hangings. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieve from

http://www.insidehighered.com/print/news/2013/01/14‐essay‐says‐faculty‐ involved‐in‐MOOCs‐may‐be‐ making‐rope‐for‐professional‐hangings

2

Eaton, C. (2013, January/Februar). The myth about online courses: Why the argument against faculty just won’t die. On Campus, 32(32), 16.

Fain, P. (2013, January 16). looks at MOOCs in online push. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieve from http://www.insidehighered.com/print/news/2013/01/16‐california‐looks‐ moocs‐online‐push.

Fain, P. (2012, November 14). Gates foundation and ACE go big on MOOC‐ related grants. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieve from http://www.insidehighered.com/print/news/2012/11/14‐gates‐foundation‐ and‐ACE‐go‐big‐on‐ MOOC‐related grant.

Glass, R. S. (Ed.). (2013, January/February). Murky MOOCs: Massive open online courses’ credit‐worthiness to be assessed by education group. On Campus, 32(32), 2.

San Jose State Offering Low‐Cost Online Classes in New Program. (2013, January 15). Retrieve from http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/01/15/san‐jose‐ state‐offering‐low‐cost‐online‐classes‐in‐new‐ program/

Siders, D. (2013, January 15). Jerry Brown touts online education pilot at San Jose State. The Sacramento Bee. Retrieve from http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2013/01/jerry‐brown‐touts‐online‐ education‐pilot‐at‐ san‐jose‐state.html#mi_rss=Top%20Stories

What Campus Leaders Need to Know About MOOCs. (2012). An Educase executive briefing. Retrieve from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB4005.pdf

Other Communication

P. Haro, President of the Academic Senate at San Diego City College (personal communication on January 15, 2013)

J. Mahler, President of CFE at San Diego Community College District. (personal communication on January 15, 2013

D. Murakami, President‐Elect of the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges, (personal communication, January 17, 2013)

3. IPC Membership Proposal—you have several options to consider in response to our recent vote on IPC membership. The senate should decide whether an IPC task force (with our preferred membership), the senate taking ownership of this process (which may include the formation of a senate task force or a joint senate‐IPC task force with our preferred membership), or leaving it in the hands of IPC with two fewer directors is the most appropriate compromise in response to our recent recommendation to the VPI.

4. E‐mail notifications of Registration Events—as you may remember, the Academic Senate passed a resolution requesting that IT turn on certain functionalities of Banner, including e‐mail notifications to faculty regarding registration events (students adding or dropping).

Senate President Vesna Marcina and Secretary Denise Cabanel‐Bleuer met with two representatives from District IT to discuss the request, and we came up with a possible configuration. We would appreciate your feedback on that configuration, as we’re still in the programming phase, so nothing is even close to being set in stone. Please share this information with your constituents and ask them for their feedback on the information below. Please bring their feedback to the meeting!

Possible Configuration:

3

1. First e‐mail notification The first e‐mail notification would arrive the morning after the first class meeting of the semester.

2. Timing, frequency and duration of e‐mail notifcations Daily e‐mail notifications would be sent to faculty early in the morning, beginning the morning after the first class meeting, and continuing every day through the first two weeks of the semester. Faculty would receive a daily e‐mail whether or not there was any registration activity. After the second week, faculty would receive an e‐mail notification only if there were registration activity, up through the morning after the final withdrawal date of the semester.

3. Content of notifications Each e‐mail would contain information about all registration activity for all assigned classes of a particular faculty member. For each class, there would be a section indicating any drops in the previous 24 hours, and then a section indicating any adds within the preceding 24 hours. The new current roster would not be replicated on this notification, as it is assumed that most faculty do not print out a new roster daily, and the current roster is always available via MyOCC. Information about each class would be divided from that of the next class visually, perhaps by a bolded line (rather than having separate pages for each class).

4. Weekly summaries At the end of the first week and at the end of the second week, faculty would receive a separate e‐mail that would summarize all registration activity during the preceding week. This would be provided as a convenience in case any faculty were concerned that they might have missed checking a daily report.

5. Format of notifications In the interest of compatibility, ease of use, and being able to maintain formatting, the information would be provided as a pdf attachment (rather than in the body of the e‐mail or as a spreadsheet file).

Action Items (cont’d) B. New Business 1. Senate Bylaws—please consider whether you prefer we keep the current full‐time faculty composition (11 division senators (1/division and 1 student services faculty member) and 9 senators‐at‐large) of the senate or increasing divisional representation and decreasing at‐large representation.

4