September 21, 2018 Meeting

Agenda

  1. Welcome new members 2018
  2. Review Charter
  3. Review Minutes from April 20, 2018
  4. Committee Review
    • 2018-19 Annual Committee Review Self Evaluation Form
    • 2018-19 Annual Committee Review Peer Assessment Form
  5. Collaborative Decision Making Practice
  6. Instructional Technology Grant
  7. Project Updates
  8. Other
  9. Next Meeting: Friday, October 19, 2018

Minutes

Members Present:

Andrew Prestage, Shelly Getty, Mark Gibson, Gus Gonzalez, Dana Hicks, Abbas Jarrahian, James May, David Mitchell, David Reynolds,

Members Absent:   

Nicole Avina, John Dodson, Richard Hudson, Aldrin Lubin, Brock McMurray, James May, Tiffany Rowden

Student Representative:

Whisper-Lynn Null

Facilitator: 

Andrew Prestage facilitated the meeting.

Recorder:

Dana Hicks recorded the meeting.

Meeting Called to Order:

The meeting called to order at 10:11 am.

  1. Welcome New Members 2018
  • The members introduced themselves. Whisper attended the meeting for the first time as the student representative.
  • Andrew introduced Gus as the new Network Administrator.
  1. Review Charter
  • The committee took some time to review and discuss the Committee’s charter.
  • The members remembered reviewing the charter at an earlier meeting and had questions about membership. In looking at the charter, the committee noticed there is already an over representation of Faculty members (charter states two reps and there are four present at this meeting.)
  • The committee questioned the membership list and membership total (listed as 14 in the charter). Andy mentioned the Governance Council discussed the topic of membership at their last meeting. There may be possibilities of adjusting the membership list and removing members as need arises.
  • In discussing the membership total, Andy stated the membership count of 14 would not be a maximum but a number to shoot for. Andy warned that as the membership count gets larger, there would be less of a chance of reaching consensus when making decisions.
  • David R. expressed concerns with faculty membership limitations. According to the faculty contract, faculty must participate in sub-committees. If committees start to limit faculty membership, this may cause issues. He suggests the need of flexibility with faculty membership counts.
  • There was a small discussion about handling sensitive information possibly discussed during meetings. As part of the discussion, the committee agreed to add the following bullet-pointed statement to the charter under “Committee Members Promise to” bulleted list: Honor the confidentiality of sensitive information shared during committee meetings.
  • There was a question of classified representation as part of committee membership. Per Mark, the HR, Library, TIL, and CTE reps would all be classified members. Classified member are not required to attend meetings; attendance is voluntary.
  • Andy, in the future, will make it a point to speak with Severo and the new VPI (when hired) and Geoffrey (Dyer) to discuss the faculty membership issues whether membership is not enough or too much in the various committees.
  1. Review Minutes from April 20, 2018
  • The committee approved the minutes from April 20, 2018 meeting as written.
  1. Committee Review
    • 2018-19 Annual Committee Review Self Evaluation Form
      • The Self-Eval Form is a required obligation the committee needs to complete. Shelly remembers the form being started last year but doesn’t remember how far the committee got towards completion.
    • 2018-19 Annual Committee Review Peer Assessment Form
      • The Annual Peer Assessment Form is a required obligation the committee needs to complete. The committee doesn’t remember ever discussing the peer assessment form at any prior meetings.

Andy will bring a copy of these forms to the next meeting for the committee to review.

  1. Collaborative Decision Making Practice
  • Andy presented the handout about the collaborative decision making practice for the committee to review and discuss in hopes of implementing this practice at future ITC meetings.
  • Andy doesn’t recall the committee ever discussing the policy / practice of making decisions.
  • Per the handout, the goals of this process include better decisions, better implementation, and better group relationships.
  • In discussing this topic, the committee asked for clarification about its own role and the ability to make recommendations / decisions about campus equipment. Some of the members didn’t realize the committee had the ability to make decisions / recommendations. Andy shared that he learned at the last Governance Council that the ITC committee could make recommendations / decisions and move them forward to the Governance Council.
  • There was a brief overview of voting hand gestures (thumbs up, thumbs down, sideways thumb). There was some confusion about the “sideways thumb” hand gesture. Whisper stated that in her experience of attending meetings, the sideways thumb indicates the member approves, but had concerns. The concerns of the member are usually addressed immediately during the meeting.
  • Due to low membership turnout, a concern expressed that decisions could potentially be postponed from meeting to meeting indefinitely. This could possibly be resolved by setting a meeting quorum (normally 2/3 of the membership count identified in the Charter).
  • The committee voted to continue this discussion due to concerns.
  1. Instructional Technology Grant
  • For the 2018-19 fiscal year, IT received $35,000 to spend on student-facing equipment.
  • Andy proposed to use these funds on upgrading A / V equipment in the Science Classrooms.
  • David R. asked if the security locks for the doors located in the back of some of the Science classrooms may be looked into for replacement.
  • Andy and Gus will see about obtaining quotes for the locks.
  • Shelly inquired about the cycle of technology refresh and if it’s still around. Andy stated the cycle still exists and is willing to meet with her to discuss.
  • Mark inquired if anyone continued in researching other options to replace Classroom Presenter software. He’s running into issues with Classroom Presenter and found out that the university that created the software no longer supports it. There’s a newer version put out by the university, but it’s very difficult to run.
  1. Project Updates
  • Due to time constraints, this topic was not covered.
  1. Other
  • Due to time constraints, no other topics were discussed.
  1. Next Meeting: Friday, October 19, 2018

Adjournment: 

The meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m.

Supporting Docs

©