Meeting Notes - March 6, 2012

Christina Espinosa-Pieb - Co-Chair

Coleen Lee-Wheat - Co-Chair


Administrative Reps

Classified Reps: Bdzil, Monary, Qian

Faculty Reps: Bryant, Lee-Wheat, Mitchell, Stockwell

Student Reps: Andrew Zhou, Aaraadhya Narra

Absent: Anderson, Espinosa-Pieb, Kandula, Norte, Roberts, Singh, Schroeder, Tomaneng

Visitors: W. Lee

I. Approval notes: Notes of February 14 and February 28, 2012 were approved with a suggested edit from Mitchell.

II. Measure C process: Lee-Wheat opened the meeting by asking the members to discuss the most efficient way of prioritizing Measure C requests.

She suggested the following processes:

  • Creating a subcommittee of three people, who attend currently the College Budget and TechTask Force Joint Prioritization Taskforce meetings and who are already members of the IPBT. The subcommittee would provide updates and recommendations to the rest of the IPBT committee, then report the IPBT’s recommendations to the Joint Committee.
  • Or the IPBT members would break into small groups to evaluate the lists and make recommendations from the IPBT .

Potential members of subcommittee include Lee-Wheat, Qian and Schroeder. This discussion will continue on the next IPBT meeting. It was generally agreed that the subcommittee process could be a valuable process at this time and could be reevaluated in the future and possibly restructured.

The next Tech Taskforce meeting is scheduled on Thursday, March 8, 2012.

III. Closing the Loop: Lee-Wheat presented a powerpoint which explained the concept of integrating assessment, resource allocation, program review, and planning. Then presented the idea of Mini Grants for review.

She asked members what could they imagine we could do if there was a pot of money that could support assessment, program and instructional planning.

Discussion followed with some ideas:

- Increasing the amount of the grants—the suggested sum per project was nominal

- Get together, retreats (talk about certain topics)—supporting group dialogue should be carefully scrutinized. Paying people extra for what the already should be doing should be avoided.

-Reading and reviewing applications – another committee

-Stipends for the part-time faculty could be a worthy grant idea

IV. Program Viability building a bridge to resource allocation: SSPBT Review Process power point was delayed to the next meeting, March 13, 2012

Back to Top