Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes
February 21, 2007
Senate members present: Ruth Frickle, Katie Gulliford, Jack Harton, Glen Avantaggio, Aaron Warnock, Eric Baer, Keith Paton, Darryl Brice, Buzz Wheeler, Phil Droke, Jeff Wagnitz, Kate Bligh.
Guest: Alice Madsen
Sitting in: Gwen Spencer
The meeting was called to order at 3:04 p.m., and the minutes of the February 7th meeting were approved.
New Business:
Darryl Brice moved to approve Physical Anthropology as a course that would satisfy requirements for non-lab science credits in the AA.
In discussion, Eric Baer expressed concern about ‘keeping track’ of such courses and whether degree requirements would need to be rewritten. A”group” has convened to discuss the process of tracking these types of cross-divisional courses. This group will meet on March 9. The matter of Physical Anthropology was tabled until after the meeting of said group.
Phil Droke reported on the FACTC meeting. Representatives from other colleges were not generally concerned about common course numbering and perceived it as a ‘done deal’. In other news: There will be an early retirement offering at North Seattle resulting from the closure of a technical program. With the retirement of the most recent chair, the State Board will be much more active than in the past.
Alice Madsen attended the meeting to present an overview and clarify the processes by which AAS degrees are developed. Essentially, they are industry driven. First, a need is noted by the college. Program coordinators and division chairs work with an ad hoc group of industry reps to identify curricular needs and develop curriculum. CAFs are developed, skill standards are set by industry reps, skill panels are identified, and demand for the training must be evident. The program review process includes an application to the State Board. The RCW and some national governing bodies have requirements as well.
To meet accreditation and State Board standards, all AAS degrees must include 15 credits of related course work in three areas: Communication, Computation and Human Relations. These courses typically come from the transfer course offerings. Which courses fit the needs of each program is determined by the program.
In discussion:
Eric Baer noted that the RCW states that the Faculty Senate is the degree granting body. Phil Droke noted that Senate was interested in being involved in reviewing the choices for general education requirements, but not accepting or rejecting specific programs.
Jeff Wagnitz clarified that AAST programs do not require Senate approval.
There was some discussion of individual student petitions to substitute certain courses for others, usually due to program schedule conflicts. Katie Gulliford clarified that this applies to degrees and not programs. Kate Bligh suggested clarifying language about what the Senate must review. A suggestion was made that a diversity and globalism requirement be included for AAS degrees.
Discussion then moved on to the WI issue. Kate Bligh suggested that the description of the 5 day withdrawal be placed with registration information in the college catalog. This will distinguish it from an instructor applied grade. In looking at minutes of past Senate meetings, it was apparent that no decision has ever been made about how the WI should be applied. The mid-term WI is currently functioning as a non-punitive grade for non-attendance in class. Students perceive it as an actual withdrawal. While instructors are not to submit WIs after the 5th week, they are still doing so for “hardship” reasons. Kate Bligh pointed out that there is a formal petition process that students can initiate with registration when a hardship situation arises so instructors do not have to be involved in that process at all. Kate also suggested, and several senate members concurred, that something other than WI could be used to act as and designate a non-punitive mid-term grade.
The discussion broke up as members had to leave and the meeting ended at approximately 4:05