General Meeting Information

Date: April 19, 2021
Time: 2:30 - 4:30 pm
Location: Zoom

  • Agenda

    Time Topic Action Objective                       Discussion Leader
    2:30-2:40 Approval of Agenda & Minutes from April 12, 2021 Joint Senates Meeting & De Anza Senate meeting  A   Chow, All

    Public Comment on Items Not On Agenda (Senate cannot discuss or take action)

    I/D All

    Committee Reports


    Student Learning Outcomes Committee

    Equity Action Council

    Instructional Planning and Budget Team

    ASCCC (Academic Senates of the CA Community Colleges) Spring Plenary--latest packet of resolutions voted on on Saturday)

    Pape, Pham, Chow

    Request for Funds for SLO Convocation (first discussion)


    Request for funds for Starbucks gift card for participants of SLO Convocation


    Needs and Confirmations



    • Faculty to serve as at-large members of Tenure Review Committees
    • FA Equity Task Force/Evaluations Workgroup


    2 additional Executive Committee members to Elections Committee

    • d222Pape

    Retention Support Services Presentation


    Presentation of Retention Support Services

    Chand, Del Rio, Weber

    Student Feedback 


    DASG presentation on a campus-wide, college facilitated student feedback and engagement system

    DASG officers: Kimberly Lam, Esha Dadbhawala, Yuetong Zhang, Matt Holt
    4:15-4:30  Good of the order Items I

    April is Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI) Awareness Month:

    DEI Awareness Month video message highlighting our California community colleges system’s commitment to DEI and anti-racism and welcoming new voices and leaders to join in the work ahead:

    DE ANZA STANDING AGAINST RACISM events, including Ethnic Studies Faculty Multiracial Panel Friday Series of discussions from April 30-May 28


    Public Comment on items not on agenda (Senate cannot discuss or take action)Actions:

    A = Action
    D = Discussion
    I = Information

    Zoom Information 

    Join Zoom Meeting

    Phone one-tap: US: +14086380968,,96480684218# or +16699006833,,96480684218#
    Meeting URL:
    Meeting ID: 964 8068 4218
    Passcode: 777342

  • Minutes

    Approval of Agenda for April 12, 2021 Joint Senates Meeting & De Anza Senate meeting 

    • Agenda approved.
    • Minutes approved.

    Public Comment on items not on agenda (Senate cannot discuss or take action)

    • No comments.

    Committee Reports

    Student Learning Outcomes Committee
    Mini convocation this Friday to focus on reflection questions on Student Success, Student Equity, and Being Equity-minded. This will be an opportunity to put to work principles learned in the Dr. DeGruy Districtwide Professional Development Day last Friday.

    Invitation has been sent out. Information is also in the Learning Outcome home page.

    Friday, April 23,10:30 to 12:30; an open forum for campus wide discussion.

    There is a working document to collect ideas towards more equity minded decisions and works

    PGA credit. Stipend for part-time faculty.

    Equity Action Council (EAC)
    The council met twice. Regular meeting on the 14th. A special meeting on Monday, the 12th, on Student Equity Plan review with Mayra Cruz. This was a statewide review that focused on racial equity.

    The council planned the formation of a racial equity task force with instructional student services and administrative equity inquiry groups. They would like to implement the plan within a 3 to 6 months time frame. Anyone interested, contact the Equity Action Council. 

    First Annual Sandra Diaz Nursing Profession Career Panel: Registered Nurses on the Frontlines. 4/27/2021,5:00 pm to 7:00 pm. 

    Ethnic Studies Multiracial Panel Series. 
The panels will convene on five consecutive Fridays, from 2:30-4:30 p.m.
    Friday, April 30: African American Studies 
    Friday, May7: Asian American and Asian Studies 
    Friday, May 14: Chicanx/Latinx Studies 
    Friday, May 21: Native American and Indigenous Studies 
    Friday, May 28: Comparative Ethnic Studies – Building Multiracial Alliances
    PGA credit. Stipend for part-time faculty.

    Karen will make sure that the Faculty "Taco T" Friday ends by 2:30 to allow people to attend.

    Instructional Planning and Budget Team (IPBT)
    Christina presented a list of 15 open positions. There is funding for eleven. The 4 unfunded positions will not be filled.

    Five of the positions were highlighted green as directly focused on equity: Faculty Director - Equity Office, AAPI Cohort Counselor, Asian American Studies Instructor, Chicanx/Latinx Studies Instructor, and Head Football Coach/REACH Coordinator. 

    This year IPBT has been working on building a foundation for equity. These 5 positions are directly equity focused. Such positions do not tend to evaluate well in the numeric rubrics. They are working on a rubric that looks at the qualitative aspects. They took a vote on March 23 to dedicate some positions to equity focused positions.

    Four other positions were highlighted as also supporting equity while not being typical instructional teaching positions: English Performance Success (EPS) Counselor (2), Librarian - Multicultural Resource Specialist, and Mathematics Instructor - Math Performance Success (MPS). The English and Math positions went back to the divisions to be determined by the respective deans.

    The fifteen positions come from retirements, and resignations, or from positions that were not approved on last year's list. 

    For the 2020-21 there was funding for eight positions because the Supplementary Retirement Plan (SRP) positions could not be replaced. An interim process was used where all requests from the Program Review comprised the preliminary list. From a list of approximately 40 requests, 22 were chosen to prioritize using IPBT’s quantitative process.

    The meeting ended with the decision to move all nine positions forward to College Council. This leaves 2 more positions to be filled


    Mylinh Pham asked about positions that have been open but not filled from previous years?

    Mary: There is probably one open position from 10 or more years ago.

    In Language Arts—the division dean had a conversation with Division Council and the positions were determined via faculty suggestions. The dean only put through the positions based on division council recommendations.

    There was a question on clarity and justification for how positions got prioritized and on the list.

    The Asian American Studies position was not on the list from last year while many of the others were. There was an ask for explanation and clarification on the process.

    Clarify with the dean of IIS/ICS as there were no retirements in IIS/ICS in 20-21 (this current academic year). The position vacated when Michael Chang retired in 2020. Prior to that, the division only put through the Chicanx/Latinx position as a replacement. 

    It’s fine if this is how decisions are made and this is how the committee members voted. It’s just that in the future then it should be fair and other departments should not be held to the standard of “it must be on your program review” and it must be “on previous lists”. Because obviously, that was not the case. 

    Cynthia: it is important to have clarity and transparency; it is wonderful to have a break from the past; maybe need to do things differently. Clarify the process going forward; it is important to establish the process. Everyone comes from a good place and a good heart. 

    Equity is a valid consideration. This view that only certain positions are aligning with equity work or in that equity framework can be limiting. There are other departments also doing valid equity work and positions that can have worthwhile impact on our students. That should also be considered. When a position appears on a list out of nowhere and with no history, it should be seen as asking to have clarity so that there is integrity in the process.

    Rick reported that the vote was close, some questioned about moving it forward and would have appreciated to wait an extra week.

    Mary added that the majority of the SRP positions next year will be classroom faculty positions. She thanked everyone for their input. She will take those back to the other tri-chairs, Heidi and Christina.

    Link to the IPBT regroup process power point

    Kimberly reported on behalf of Lianna: 
    New Senate training for the ’21-’22 DASG Senate will begin on May 7th. Recently held the first of three equity trainings for the current DASG, ICC, and Student Trustee that will continue through the quarter. They have invited Jewish students to come to their meeting to collaborate on the draft of a resolution to condemn antisemitism. DASG internal committees will be working on editing committee codes, specifically for the new Equity and Diversity committee.

    Spring Plenary, Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, April 15-17. 
    The delegates voted on the latest packet of resolutions on Saturday. All of the resolutions were approved. The resolution denouncing anti Asian American hate was approved by acclamation.

    Request for Funds for SLO Convocation (first discussion)

    Request for $250 for Starbucks gift card for participants of SLO Convocation. Dr Holmes has contributed $250 to support gift cards to the first 50 registrants for the convocation this Friday. The request is for the Academic Senate to match that amount per its usual and customary practice. Since this is the first discussion, the Senate will vote in its next meeting.

    Needs and Confirmation

    Faculty to serve as at-large members of Tenure Review Committees for the 11 new hires/new positions
    Faculty representative, FA Equity Task Force/Evaluations Workgroup to update J1 and J2. 

    2 additional Executive Committee members to Elections Committee
    Mary Sullivan and Bob Kalpin volunteered to join Betty on the Election Committee.

    DEI Awareness Month video

    Retention Support Services

    Presentation of Retention Support Services

    Patricia De Rio, Program Coordinator, Retention Support Services; Sashini Chand, students Success Specialist, Retention Support Services; Janet Weber, counselor who serves and assist with retention and the academic probation students

    The presentation focused on the redesign of academic probation at De Anza that changed the negative connotation associated with probation, to a supportive service oriented and student centered movement.

    In 2019 the Dean of Counseling explored the current probation status, and wanted to change probation from being punitive to a more compassionate process, where they reach out individually to students to see their needs and support them through counseling referrals and student services. The Dean of Counseling formulated the Retention Workgroup consisting of two general counselors, Dean of Enrollment, support staff, and a retention counselor. Retention Support Services was established in August of 2019 to address the high number of students on academic and progress probation at De Anza, and began services in the winter of 2020.

    Impact of Academic and Progress Probation on students
    Federal, state, and institutional policies and mandates prevent students on academic probation or progress probation from achieving educational goals. A student may lose benefits such as financial aid, priority registration, eligibility for students support programs, scholarships and or book vouchers. These institutional and systemic practices and policies are punitive and inequitable.

    Per federal and state guidelines the workgroup developed three levels of academic and progress probation and the corresponding required interventions before a student reaches pre dismissal or dismissal status. Each level of probation has specific requirements for students to contact and have a conversation about their academic progress with retention support services, or with their academic counselor.

    They have collaborations across campus to develop data collection on students on probation. Prior to retention support services, there was no data collection for students on probation. Retention Support Services has been working closely with Admissions and Records, ETS, and Institutional Research & Planning to strengthen existing reports and create new reports for effective identification and follow up of students on probation by extracting data stored in eSARS, Argos, and the Program Review Data Tool. They have established initial baselines to capture future trends, recognize equity gaps, and develop a student profile. They have formulated a student profile for students on probation to better align their services to this specific student population.

    Data for students on academic and progress probation for spring of 2020
    The majority of students on probation are Latinx males between the ages of 20, 78% are continuing students, 36% are first generation students, 37% are low income students. 68% of students on academic probation are part time students, and most importantly, 89% of students on probation may not be associated with a student support program.

    Retention support services strive to provide the support students need and may not be receiving elsewhere. 
    Retention support services take a new non punitive stance on probation.
    This new strategy flips the negative connotation associated with probation and applies a growth mindset, letting students know that probation is temporary, that it does not define or determine who they are or their future.

    They delivered relational student interaction, building relationships with students, so that their interaction with us is not just transactional, but meaningful and supportive conversation. They practiced the ethics of care and compassion, and really listened to student response and their needs. They helped students by lifting holds, scheduling counseling appointments, or follow up through campus research referrals. 

    High frequency-high touch comes in as the retention team communicates with students on an ongoing basis through frequent phone calls and emails. They called every single enrolled student on probation, at least once every term for the past four terms. They emailed them regarding their probation status and retention services, several times per term. This ongoing student communication paired with a case management, and students centric approach is what exemplifies the retention team’s comprehensive services. 

    Some of the interventions provided were a direct result of this ongoing communication. Many students were not comfortable with online learning. Some students needed laptops. Many students were affected by COVID.  They are someone in their family who have lost their jobs or have their hours reduced, while others were essential workers and were working more hours. These conversations resulted in a partnership with financial aid to provide students on probation book vouchers for their textbooks and workshops in student services, such as financial aid, the food pantry and the MPS program.

    Many students said that they have never had someone from De Anza call them before the retention teams reach out. They also reached out to stop-out students. These are students with active academic probation holds for the past two years. It's important to keep stop-outs in the loop regarding registration, campus closure, and ongoing services. They invited them to workshops, showing that De Anza hasn't forgotten or given up on them. They sent them an email every term providing detailed steps to re-enroll and offered support for their return. Students also have ready contact for questions. This effort led to 311 probation holds being removed during the spring term.

    The retention team student reach outs and interventions are making a huge difference. Since the retention team began their intervention services in winter of 2020, there was a 52% drop in the number of students on academic probation from fall 2019 to 2020. There was a drastic reduction in the number of students on academic probation, who did not re-enroll. For example, 718 students on academic probation did not re-enroll for winter in 2019, compared to 620 students on academic probation, who did not re-enroll for winter of 2020. 556 students on academic probation, who did not re-enroll for spring of 2019 compared to only one student on academic probation, who did not enroll for spring of 2020.

    Impact of retention services in students who returned to academic good standing. Winter and Spring of 2019, eight students moved off academic probation. Winter and Spring of 2020, 317 students moved off academic probation. 24% of students on academic probation returned to good standing.

    Student Success Rate 
    2018-19 39%
    2019-20 41%
    2020-21 61%

    Spring 2020 Highlights
    77% of students on probation persisted from winter term to spring term 2020;
    1414 touch points with students on probation;
    849 unduplicated students served;
    24% of students on academic probation regained good standing.

    Student Success-Jason’s Story
    Jason went from 3rd level probation, 1.8 GPA, in Fall 2019 to good academic standing, 3.18 GPA, in Fall 2020. Jason's story illustrate how flipping a negative connotation associated with probation and practicing relational student interactions through the ethics of care, Retention Support Services is moving the needle and increasing student success.

    Next Steps
    Reduce the number of students who fall into academic and progress probation. This includes an early alert initiative expanding student contact, to be intentional and proactive, to prevent students from falling into probation.  Collaborate with faculty to identify concerns, then follow up to schedule counseling appointments, and refer students to campus resources. Strengthen our partnerships with current campus resources and services. Create opportunities for engagement and community. Continue to uncover student needs and search for ways to meet these needs.

    Cynthia: This is amazing! It was so hard to have struggling students not eligible for support because they were being punished 

    Rick: This will do more to closing the equity gap than anything else.

    There was a question on early alert.

    Sushini Chand: We are currently configuring the early alert software and beginning work on early alert.  Our tentative timeline is for a soft launch in the summer and a tentative full launch in the fall.

    Alma Garcia: Probation can be a triggering word for some communities of color. Have you all thought of changing the probation term to a more equity minded term?

    Patricia Del Rio: Language and terms definitely matter! Academic and Progress probation are terms used within and statewide - so changing the terminology may be complex.  I welcome the thought, will take note and look further into this possibility.  Thank you for this question and concept!

    Student Feedback

    DASG presentation on a campus-wide, college facilitated student feedback and engagement system

    Esha Dadbhawala, 1st year DASB Senator, member of IPBT, Chair of Student Feedback Committee

    Student Feedback is a project to increase communication and transparency, improve existing relationships and communication between De Anza faculty, students, and administration. The goal of the project is to establish a kind, intentional feedback system that increases transparency and civility on campus.

    Student Feedback Norms and Values
    Baseline guiding principles for this project.
    Input from administration students and faculty, and this could take the form of a shared governance or task force.

    Establishment of equity parameters. Designate someone to identify and address systemic biases that affect data evaluation. Make sure that equity is not an afterthought in data collection.

    Faculty should definitely have access to qualitative data before it goes public, to remove problematic comments and feedback unrelated to teaching. She acknowledged that students are not 100% capable of moderating their qualitative feedback in a way that is appropriate, civil, or intentional. They would like to remove antagonistic, aggressive, and inequitable comments unrelated to teaching and course content. 

    Data published to students with multiple parameters including mean, median, standard deviations, percentile rankings and full explanation of data in lay person’s terms. Students are looking for information from an unbiased and regulated source that would help them to better choose classes.

    Problem with existing forms of student feedback or communication between students and faculty

    Rate My Professor
    No one really likes Rate My Professor; students are not shy about posting explicit and unfavorable commentary on courses, there's evident lack of civility there, and also an evident presence of discrimination in these types of comments; comments are fully anonymous and public; none of the information is objective or useful to students; reviews are from two extremes, either students are really really happy with the professor or really really unhappy with the professor, without any objective or informational data. There's just information about personal feelings towards a professor and nothing on core structure or teaching styles which are helpful to students selecting courses.

    Students have no guidance on choosing professors. No consistent data available. It's difficult to extract information from emotional, social media posts to select professors that work best for you. 

    Lack of Student Input
    Classes are constructed without student input. Underserved communities only get input on supplementary resources, not courses themselves.

    Equity Violations
    There is no process to deal with equity issues besides filing a formal report or going over the professor's head to the dean. That is a difficult course of action requiring credible evidence. Professors ignoring DSPS accommodations, stereotyping students, engaging in homophobic, sexist, racist rhetoric, etc. There is a lack of an informal process to deal with those equity issues that don't result in extremely punitive measures. 

    Cynthia moved to add ten minutes to the agenda item. Betty seconded. 17 yes, 0 no, 2 abstention.

    The project identified one study that conducted an analysis of 5000 classes. 
    The study reviewed five groups of courses selected to represent diverse academic disciplines at the graduate and undergraduate levels from different countries.

    Research shows that students’ evaluations of educational quality to be multidimensional, reliable and stable, a function of instructor rather than course content, relatively valid against a variety of indicators of effective teaching,  relatively unaffected by a variety of variables hypothesized as potential biases and perceived as useful feedback by faculty about their teaching by students for use in course selection and by administrators for use in personnel decisions.

    Closing and Goals
    Their primary goal was to represent student interests. Their intention is not to create the utopian system but one that is undeniably beneficial for everyone and improves campus quality in comparison to status quo pathways. 

    Their aim was to create a consensus that first a student feedback model is necessary. Second, that a centralized collaboration is instrumental in making sure that the input and feedback of various interest groups are accurately represented in the creation of any new system. A decentralized system designed by students with feedback from other interest groups but would absolutely reduce the harms of existing forms of feedback. They did not present any fully fledged feedback system, but they proposed the creation of a shared governance system or a task force that is collaborative and takes the first steps in that process

    Cynthia commented on the thoughtful presentation, and the strategic sophistication of saying, there is a problem we need to solve it. She looked forward to working together on it.

    Specific questions, do we need to move on from the status quo, is there a consensus on creating a new system; does the creation of that system need to take place through some sort of shared governance task force.

    The next step should be jointly determined and agreed upon by both college academic senate, student government , and FA. Foothill is working on their own student feedback model.

    Kimberly: 1) Do we need to change the status quo on student feedback - aka Rate My Professor, social media? 2) Should we move forward with some sort of task force regarding student feedback changes?

    Good of the Order

    April is Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI) Awareness Month:

    • DEI Awareness Month video message highlighting our California community colleges system’s commitment to DEI and anti-racism and welcoming new voices and leaders to join in the work ahead:
    • De Anza Celebrates May Day April 26 1:30-2:20
    • Mary S motioned, Terrence seconded, to adjourn, no objection.





    Karen Chow


    Mary Pape

    Executive Secretary

    So Kam Lee

    Part-time Faculty Representatives

    Ishmael Tarikh

    Mary Donahue

    Academic Services & 
    Leaning Resources

    Cecilia Hui


    Bio/Health/Environmental Sciences 

    Robert Kalpin

    Anna Miller

    Business/Computer Science/
    Applied Technologies

    Rick Maynard


    Counseling and Disability Support Programs & Services

    Betty Inoue

    Kevin Glapion*

    Anita Vazifdar

    Creative Arts  


    Elizabeth Mjelde

    Equity and Engagement

    Cynthia Kaufman


    Intercultural/International Studies

    Anu Khanna


    Language Arts 

    Shagun Kaur

    Lauren Gordon

    Physical Education 

    Louise Madrigal

    Rusty Johnson

    Physical Sciences, Math, & Engineering

    Lisa Mesh

    Terrence Mullens

    Social Sciences & Humanities

    Rich Booher

    Nellie Vargas

    Student Development & EOPS

    Mary Sullivan


    Curriculum Committee

    Erik Woodbury

    Professional Development*

    Dawn Lee Tu

    Administrator Liaison*

    Lorrie Ranck

    DASB Representative*

    Lianna Vaughan

    Kimberly Lam

    Faculty Association Representative*

    Bob Stockwell

    *non-voting member





    Lloyd Holmes

    De Anza President

    Rob Miesa

    VP of Student Services

    Christina Espinosa-Pieb

    VP of Instruction

    Pam Grey

    VP of Administrative Services

    Hyon Chu Yi-Baker

    Director of College Life & Student Judicial Affairs


    Marisa Spatafore

    Associate VP of Communications & External Relations

    Scott Olsen

    Classified Senate

    Max Meyberg

    De Anza Student Trustee

    Mallory Newell-

    Institutional Research

    Moaty Fayek

    Dean of Business/Computer Info Systems

    Renee Augenstein

    Articulation Officer

    Brian Malone

    Tenure Review Coordinator

    Daniel Smith

    Dean of Creative Arts

    Eric Mendoza

    Dean of Physical Education and Athletics

    Alicia Cortez

    Dean of Equity and Engagement

    Randy Bryant

    Dean of Career & Technical Education (CTE)

    Kathryn Maurer

    Foothill Academic Senate President

    Isaac Escoto

    FHDA District Academic Senate President

    Laureen Balducci

    Dean of Counseling, DSPS & Title IX Coordinator

    Anita Kandula

    Dean of Biological, Health, and Environmental Sciences

    Michele LeBleu-Burns

    Dean of Student Development/EOPS

    Lisa Mandy

    Director of Financial Aid

    Nazy Gayloyan

    Dean of Enrollment Services

    Edmundo Norte

    Dean of Intercultural/International Studies

    Jerry Rosenberg

    Dean of Physical Sciences, Math & Engineering

    Judy Miner

    FHDA Chancellor

    Elvin Ramos

    Dean of Social Sciences and Humanities

    Patrick Gannon

    Director, Book Store

    David Ulate

    FHDA Research & Planning

    Mae Lee

    Curriculum Committee Vice-Chair

Documents and Links

Back to Top