Meeting Notes - November 15, 2011

 Christina Espinosa-Pieb - Co-Chair

 Coleen Lee-Wheat - Co-Chair


Administrative Reps Anderson, Espinosa-Pieb, Muthyala-Kandula, Schroeder, Tomaneng

Classified Reps: Englen, Knittel, Qian

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

Student Reps: Kenneth Perng

I. Approval notes: Notes of November 8, 2011 were approved.

II. Instructions:

A brief review of the purpose and the viability process of was discussed. Espinosa-Pieb clarified that the IPBT will be identifying programs and making recommendations for restructuring, suspension/reduction, and discontinuance. The definitions of each are described on the revised IPBT calendar that was distributed. Anderson requested a statement from the Co-Chair Lee-Wheat who also reiterated the message that based on a review of the data; program discontinuance is most definitely a recommendation that the IPBT may be making. Espinosa-Pieb also stated that this process is meant to be as transparent as possible. And she feels that the process, which has been evolving, is allowing for joint participation of all instructional related groups. She also remarked that if any party decided to opt out of the process that the remaining participants or the administration alone will proceed to make these decisions. She strongly encouraged anyone on the committee who feels that the work ahead is not for them to please step away NOW.
Description of the open meetings on Nov. 17 and 18 were then described. They can be attended by anyone. The Deans have been invited and asked to bring panels of faculty to answer the questions from the IPBT members regarding the Division's reduction plans and processes for arriving at these plans. The schedule for the presentations was reviewed and posted on the IPBT website. There will be time for IPBT review of the presentations on Friday afternoon. 
Lee-Wheat briefly reported the College Council did not support the concept of the one year probationary status for programs recommended for discontinuance. They felt that the process as it existed on the flow chart would allow flexibility for the IPBT to provide any number of years with recommendations for a department to work through the program review process subsequent to a viability team review. 

Back to Top