Participatory Governance Committee Membership & Issues for 2012-13

Two very important committees


In the fall, the Senate has to seat 9 representatives on Program and Budget Council (PBC), our school’s most important participatory governance committee (a 10th Faculty person is selected by the AFT).  Terms are for two years (but people can be reaffirmed for another two years by Senate).  These 9 representatives represent the entire campus.

This committee meets the third Wednesday of every month, and unlike other committees, uses for proxies/alternates the term “the designated alternate” which I presume means the same person each time, for reasons that seem obvious to the charge of the committee.

Faculty duties of this committee include:  written reports from the constituents represented (which is the Academic Senate) and to report back to the Academic Senate. 

There seems to be little doubt that Program and Budget Council will be dealing with program discontinuance, program reductions or possible suspensions, as some members of PBC have suggested).  They will have received some Program Effectiveness ratings from the Program Effectiveness and Planning Committee (PEPC), which also has to select members.

The way it works for Program Discontinuance (PD) is that each campus is to designate a committee to advise the President about PD.  On our campus, that task is given by our PGM to PBC, which can collect data and advice from any other committee.  PEPC is required to report to PBC about program effectiveness.  Here is the Board’s Program Discontinuance Procedure. 

According to the procedure, PBC studies the budget situation.  Note that part of the possible rubric for disc

Cost of program delivery relative to performance in relation to the program metrics adopted by the college.

Other criteria as determined by the college.

PEPC did not look at cost data; that is going to fall to PBC this year.  If we want to change this process (I recommend not changing it), we can, through formal Senate action and changes to the PGM (Participatory Governance Manual).

Once PBC makes its recommendations (which need to be firmed up by the last September meeting), those recommendations go to the Executive Vice President, who agrees or disagrees, but in any case presents a response to the full Academic Senate.  The Academic Senate then deliberates, having heard both the PBC recommendations and the views of the EVP and either agrees or demurs, and provides its own response.  The result of this process then goes to the President, who takes it under consideration and makes his own recommendations to the Board.  The Board must affirm all program discontinuances (but not reductions) and a plan has to be developed so that students in those programs are not impacted.


From the charge of PEPC:

Members come from divisions and departments and are comprised of the Department Chair, Coordinator, Supervisor, or designee. In addition, all members are to have a designated alternate attend in the event of their absence. Members are to be appointed/selected annually.  (Note:  most of us have been laboring under the impression that department chairs had to do this; but they can actually designate another department member if they wish)


Executive Vice President of Student Learning Academic Senate President or Senate designee

Division/Department/Constituency Representatives: Five management representatives which includes the Dean of Student Services and the Vice President of Business Services  (Note:  there is no provision for designees in this paragraph; when the committee was set up, the need for financial information was well understood as part of the planning process, hence the need for the VP of Business Services; the need for the perspective on Instructional Effectiveness as seen from Student Services was also regarded as crucial).

Division/Department/Constituency Representatives:  Two Academic senate representatives (appointed by the Academic Senate) Two classified staff representatives including one from the Business Services division Two student representatives (appointed by Associated Student Government).  I hope to affirm two faculty members as Senate representatives to PEPC at our first Senate meeting.

Instructional: Those instructional departments with a designated Department Chair, Coordinator or Facilitator, including at least one Student Services representative.

PEPC distributes data to programs (last year I believe we had 27 designated programs) and expects them to write something called a PEPR (Program Effectiveness and Planning Report).  These reports change a bit every year, in response to changes in state law, Title V, participatory governance, board objectives, and  – the budget.

In 2011-2012, two PEPR’s were required, because of the issues surrounding the sudden imposition of “Program Discontinuance” on three colleges in our district by the Chancellor.  Resource request forms were not required with the second report, but will be accepted (as usual) in the fall.  It is likely that this two part PEPR process will continue into the future, with addenda being required to the original report as needed to keep all our programs in the best possible shape.

This committee meets on the fourth Tuesday of every month.


Other committees, alphabetically

CUDS (Campus Use, Development and Safety Committee)

This committee became moribund during 2010-11, due in part to the loss of our Vice President of Business Services, and there was apparently no faculty Co-Chair.  The Co-Chair can been any full time faculty member and the search is on to find one.   The Academic Senate also gets to appoint one additional faculty member.  This is a crucial committee on our campus, so we need to get it organized over the summer.  In addition, there are 9 additional faculty (from the departments listed in the PGM) who should be attending.  

CUDS meets second Tuesday of every month.  We’re currently looking for a regular meeting space for it – hopefully in the Admin Building.  The co-chairs are the VP of Business Services (so no one, right now) and a faculty chair appointed, apparently, by the AS President (with Senate approval of course).  I’m working on that one.


Curriculum Committee meets on the second and fourth Wednesdays of each month.  While the implementation of Curricunet may, at first, mean some frustration in transition, I’m hearing from some campuses that are using it that in the long run, it really makes the whole process much, much easier.  It may necessitate some minor redesigns of curriculum process, but in the end, if it is anything like eLumens was for LOT, it may make that committee’s business much easier.

Every department has a curriculum rep, so be sure to know who yours is!

That committee is chaired by the Academic Senate President or designee and that designee is Teresa Bonham for Fall.  The committee itself was charged by Pres. Robert Cabral with finding a faculty replacement for Teresa, while she’s on sabbatical, for Spring, but word on the street is that it is Shannon Davis, our Articulation Officer.  Review the PGM for rules on who gets to sit on Curriculum Committee.  Its traditional meeting spot has been CSSC-101, and the first meeting for fall should be on August 22.

Learning Outcomes Team

LOT deals with SLO’s and assessment of Student Learning Outcomes on campus.  It is a faculty-driven process and it is our one most important way of ascertaining that we are meeting state-wide – and our own goals – about what students should be learning.  It is about identifying strengths and weaknesses (and improvement) in how students are learning.

Every course in the catalogue must have course level Student Learning Outcomes, which are listed on the syllabus.  Every course must have an Assessment Calendar, usually linked to a Department or Discipline calendar, whereby leaning assessment data is submitted for every Course Level SLO for that course.  This must happen at least once every two academic years.  It’s probably easiest to do all the CSLO’s for all sections in the same semester, but there are no hard and fast rules.  Some programs are assessing all sections more frequently than every two academic years, which provides way more data for analysis.  It is up to the Department to decide these things.  Everyone can always input more data than the minimum!

Every Program has Program Level SLO’s as well.  Each course’s SLO’s are supposed to be mapped to the PSLO’s (eLumens provides a quick and easy “matrix” for doing this – takes only a few minutes).

Then, at a time designated by the department (after the data from the assessments has been input), a Course Level Improvement Plan should be created for each course.  Some departments, allowing the disciplines to do this on their own calendars, have allowed great independence to the disciplines for completing this part of the process on their own time frame – but again, it must be within the four semesters.

Next, a designated person within the Department, Program or Discipline (varies by Department) writes a Program Improvement Plan.  The idea for that plan is to use as much data as is available (which may mean going back for a few semesters and opening the .pdf’s that eLumens provides).  On the other hand, some  programs have decided to do all their data collection in one semester, and therefore, would be looking at only one semester’s data (again, it varies).  Program Improvement Plans, more than anything else, are supposed to help instructors find ways to 1) address any instructional area weaknesses, 2) adequately reconsider the scope of the course (even considering creation of new curriculum if needed, or such things as advisories or prerequisites) or 3) modifying the SLO calendar and process (within institutional guidelines) to give better data.

SLO data are not the only way of improving a program, but eLumens and LOT are our institutional mechanisms for ensuring we meet Accreditation Standards in this area.  You can do your program improvement plans at any time during the 2 year cycles (or more than once, actually), but if you have waited until the end of your 2 your cycle (the last one is ended on May 17, 2012, with the end of the contract year and LOT has requested the PIP’s by May 4, to be uploaded to sharepoint as part of the PEPR process as well), that’s something that needs to be done now.

LOT will be considering, next year, how often it seems reasonable to do PIPs, but the process otherwise remains the same.

Because LOT is transitioning from being a PGM committee to being a standing committee that offers and receives advice from both Curriculum and Student Success Committees, its membership may be changing and its meeting date may be changing as well.  Stay tuned.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s