Meeting Notes - March 3, 2010
Cook shared that she is working to clarify the SSPBT membership and process for determining the co-chair and will provide an update at the next meeting.
Haynes - the SLO co-chairs are proposing a mega review timed with the accreditation cycle. They are reviewing the proposal with all the governance groups for feedback. Every group is being asked to complete one piece of curriculum with SLOs for this year, to address the emergency situation.
Cook acknowledged the guests attending from areas affected by the proposed realignment. She asked everyone attending to talk with members of the SSPBT to discuss their concerns. Eventually, there will be a recommendation made to the College Council and Senior Staff. Cook assured everyone there is no hidden agenda and asked for comments in the form of suggestions and why.
Coleman – What would the realignment save?
Cook - Provide equity in the Student Services areas, i.e. ISP, Health Services and Outreach.
Coleman – Is the realignment because there are problems?
Cook – The realignment gives us a chance to look at what we are doing, preparation for Program Review and Accreditation, not problem solving.
Cook will attend staff meetings to work through the questions.
Milonas - What is it we are trying to accomplish?
Cook – There is an imbalance within the three deans areas. She welcomes input on how it is done at other colleges.
Chan – There is already a direct connection with ISP and Counseling because of the Counseling 100 course. They have formated alliances with Counseling that are important.
Cook - The realignment does change the reporting line. There will be a larger discussion.
Nickel – Other colleges look to De Anza as the role model. We should look at how we are serving students, not what is happening with the deans. Our plan has been working. Why would we want to change it? There should be more time to review things before making a change.
Cook – Willing to learn, depending on everyone to help.
Joplin – What is Cook’s agenda for the realignment?
Cook - How we can improve delivery of services. Based on our resources, if we do not have more counselors on the floor, what can we do if we have more students, how do we connect to them. How can we maximize the use of technology, other than Banner. She asked everyone to encourage students to participate, especially on the SSPBT.
Cheung – There should be discussions with each area, input gathered and then a proposal prepared.
Cook – The proposal is a reflection of what senior staff sees. We can revise the proposal and will take the message back to senior staff.
Irvin – Everyone has a concern for the Counseling Division and that something is being taken away from him or her, which is not the case.
Sokabe – This is the first time Health Services has had a dean that really listens and does not understand why the relationship should change.
Joplin – For the first time in a long time, people feel comfortable and have good leadership in the Counseling Division. They are always looking at ways to serve the students.
Tao – There is a lot of anxiety because of the way the realignment is being handled. Doesn’t see how this is better for the students and wants more collaboration. Asked the VP to advocate for them. They are wiling to work together, but feel more changes make people feel overwhelmed.
Mieso - The proposal was presented for discussion and provides for feedback to keep it a clear process. We are changing and we are not going to be the same for the next 30 years. Need to look at it from the student’s perspective.
Irvin – Respects the process and Cook. He looks forward to her leadership and willingness to advocate for Student Services.
Cook – will advocate for everyone in all areas of Student Services.
Summary and Agenda Items
The next meeting is scheduled for March 17th.