General Meeting Information

Date: March 10, 2020
Time: 4:00 - 5:00 PM
Location: Admin 109

  • Agenda

    Time Topic Purpose Discussion Leader
    4:00 - 4:05 Approval of Notes - February 18 & 25, 2020  A Ranck/Pape
    4:05 - 4:10 DASB Report I/D Liang, Nguyen
    4:10 - 5:00 Program Review D Ranck/Pape

    A = Action D = Discussion I = Information





    • Lorrie Ranck, Co-Chair
    • Sam Bliss
    • Randy Bryant
    • Alicia Cortez
    • Moaty Fayek
    • Anita Muthyala-Kandula
    • Thomas Ray
    • Thomas Bailey
    • Dana Kennedy
    • Lorna Maynard
    • Ed Ahrens
    • Diana Alves de Lima
    • Cheryl Balm
    • Milena Grozeva
    • Rick Maynard
    • Mary Pape, Co-Chair
    • Erik Woodbury
    • Halina Liang
    • John Nguyen
  • Minutes

    Administrative reps:  Randy Bryant, Moaty Fayek, Thomas Ray

    Classified reps: Thomas Bailey, Dana Kennedy, Lorna Maynard

    Faculty reps: Diana Alves de Lima, Cheryl Balm, Milena Grozeva, Mary Pape (co-chair), Erik Woodbury

    Student reps: Halina Liang, John Nguyen

    Guests: Maya Burns (DASB), Vins Chacko (ACE Rep), Lisa Markus (FA Rep), Shelly Michael (DASB), Mallory Newell, Paige Wallace (DASB)

    Absent: Ed Ahrens, Sam Bliss, Alicia Cortez, Rick Maynard, Anita Muthyala-Kandula, Lorrie Ranck (co-chair)

    Approval of Notes:

    Correction to  25 February notes:  Erik Woodbury was not present

    Correction to February 18 notes: The approval of notes for February 11 was postponed.

    11 February notes were approved.

    DASB Report: DASB unanimously voted to approve their 2020-21 DASB budget.

    Discussion: Due to COVID-19, there are students petitions about moving classes online on One concern is that students who have expressed their concerns about attending class has caused some issues with faculty. Some students feel they are not being taken seriously by faculty and administration. DASB has not taken a formal vote on this petition since it was not on the agenda ahead of time, and DASB meetings need to adhere to Brown Act.

    One student proposal is to prioritize moving classes online as much as possible, and for those for which this is not possible,  to meet in-person as little as possible.

    DASB leadership is not just responsible to present their own opinions, but also the opinions of the student body. Many students are commuting from different places using public transportation, and this is a higher risk activity. Also, some students are in multi-generational households, and some students are caretakers, so are concerned for the health of others, not themselves.

    It was noted that moving classes online is not always simple, such as the need for hands-on labs, etc.  Also, not all students are prepared for and have access for completing classes online, and not all faculty are prepared for teaching online. Conversations are ongoing and we should try to accommodate individual students and faculty members.

    Program Review discussion

    The Groups are reading Program Reviews and coming up with questions. There are, however, some more general questions.

    How do we respond when a PR asks for a counseling position?

    This position needs to be requested as a faculty hire in next round faculty hiring.

    If PR answers "Yes" to needing help with equity, how can IPBT respond?

    IPBT may need to take that question off the PR unless there is some way to actually work with those departments and help them. IPBT could ask them what kind of help they need with equity.  It would be good to ask the Dean of Equity and Engagement what to do. One idea is to make sure departments requesting help are identified, and make sure they get special invites to Professional Development workshops involving equity.

    What about furniture/remodel rooms requests?

    It depends – if a department is CTE,  SWF money might be available for this. Would requests go to the Facilities Committee? Or go to APBT?  What is the process for departments to submit facilities requests? Should IPBT pull out all facilities requests and pass on to APBT?

    What are the limits for student tutors, and how should IPBT respond to requests for student tutors?

    There is a 12-unit minimum for students working under certain funding.

    Work-study students have a 6-unit minimum but must be eligible for work-study (not international students, nor undocumented). The 12-unit is a district rule. Tutors need training. It was suggested departments requesting tutors consult with Randy and Diana.

    Staff positions - how do divisions get NEW staff positions?

    The groups should keep a list. College Planning might have something on this in spring to support equity work.

    Some departments asked for Canvas training, how best to communicate who they should work with? 

    They should contact the Online Learning Center.

    Summary of things to work on:

    • Need to have a process to move forward with facilities request
    • Need to have a process for identifying, prioritizing and funding new staff positions.
    • Need a response to those departments who ask for equity help.

     Discussion on the IPBT timetable moving forward: Resource allocation should be done in spring 2020, and IPBT should start compiling the list for faculty hiring in spring. Should the faculty hiring list be ranked in spring? When should PR be due in 20-21? This year’s date of the first week in February for PR worked well for SWF and Perkins.

Documents and Links

Back to Top