>> CHAIRWOMAN LET'S GET STARTED.
[00:00:11]
WELCOME,[1. Roll Call - Announcement of a Quorum ]
EVERYONE.WE HAVE A QUORUM TODAY PRESENT IN-PERSON.
IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 551 WITH THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT I CALL TO ORDER THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF DALLAS COLLEGE FOR DECEMBER 2ND, 2021, AT 2:03:00 P.M.
MEMB HAVE FOLLOWED THE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE DALLAS COLLEGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES WEBSITE FOR REGISTERING TO SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION WILL BE GIVEN FIVE MINUTES TO SPEAK.
THIS MEETING IS BEING BROADCAST OVER THE INTERNET.
AN AUDIO RECORDING AND TRANSCRIPT OF THE MEETING ARE BEING MADE AND MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC ON THE BOARD'S WEBSITE OFFER THE MEETING AT A LATER DATE.
CHAN CONFIRM THIS MEETING HAS BEEN POSTED.
[2. Certification of Notice Posted for the Meeting ]
>> CHANCELLOR MAY: MADAM CHAIR, THIS MEETING WAS POSTED ACCO GOVERNMENT CODE 551.054.
[3. Pledges of Allegiance to U.S. and Texas Flags]
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: THANK YOU.
WE WILL STAND AND DO THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATI INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
HONO PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS, ONE STATE UNDER GOD, ONE AND INDIVISIBLE.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: THERE WE GO.
DO WE HAVE ANY CITIZENS DESIRING TO ADDRESS THE BOARD TODAY? (SPE MICROPHONE.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: THANK YOU.
[5. Public Hearing on Redistricting Plan]
THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE REDISTRICTING PLAN IS NOW OPEN.WE HAVE RECEIVED NO REQUESTS FOR ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK.
SINCE NO ONE HAS SUBMITTED REQUEST TO SPEAK, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED.
WE W ON THE AGENDA, DISCUSSION OF THE DRAFT PLAN BY THE BOARD AND ANY
[6. Discussion of Draft Plan by the Board and any amendments if, necessary, to finalize the draft plan for future adoption ]
AMENDMENTS, IF NEEDED TO FINALIZE.AND WE WILL HAVE DAVI BICKERSTAFF.
>> YES, GOOD AFTERNOON, BOARD MEMBERS.
I'M HERE WITH KIMBERLY KELLY, ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE FIRM AND WORKS WITH ME ON THESE PROJECTS.
>> SHE HAS KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROJECT.
SO W IS GET US BACK UP TO SPEED FOR THE RECORD AND LET YOU KNOW THE DISTRICT IS OUT OF BALANCE BY A SMALL AMOUNT, 24%.
IN PARTICULAR, BECAUSE DISTRICT NUMBER 6 WAS THE MOST UNDERPOPULATED DISTRICT AT 12%.
DISTRICT NUMBER 2, WHICH IS ON OUR MOST POPULACE DISTRICT AT 11.49% OVERPOPULATED, HAPPENS TO BE JUST AROUND DISTRICT NUMBER 6 AND PROVIDED PERFECT FORUM FOR THE CHANGE OF TERRITORY SO WE CAN BALANCE.
[00:05:01]
AND WE LOOKED AT SOME OF THE SUGGESTIONS AROUND THE DISTRICT OF (INAUDIBLE) COUNTY.DREW BROWN, OUR TECHNICIAN HAS THE CHART THAT SHOWS THE IMBALANCE IN THE DISTRICTS AS THEY ARE TODAY.
AND HAS THE MAP -- (SIMULTANEOUS SPEAKING)
>> SO I THINK DREW SHOULD BE PUTTING UP THE OTHER MAP HERE IN A SECOND.
MISS MOLINA, DO WE HAVE THESE GRAPHS THAT HE'S SHOWING?
LET'S TURN ON THE WEBSITE FROM THE DISTRICT.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: THIS IS THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT FROM TWO MEETINGS AGO.
>> YOU KNOW I KEEP ALL THESE NUMBERS IN MY HEAD.
>> I'M JUST ASKING FOR DREW TO MINIMIZE THIS CHART.
SO DREW, IF YOU COULD MINIMIZE THIS CHART AND PUT UP THE MAP.
SO WHAT WE HAVE AT THE DISTRICT -- AND PROBABLY YOU COULD SEE IT BETTER ON THE BIG CHARTS THAN ON THE -- WHAT WE CALL THE COW HERE IN THE COMPUTER ON WHEELS.
IN CASE BOARD MEMBERS WANT TO COME UP TO THE MAP, WE CAN DO A CLOSE-UP.
DREW CAN WE DO A CLOSE-UP IN AREAS OF DISTRICT 6 AND 2, WHERE WE MAKE CHANGES AND OVERLAY THE BENCH LINE.
THE BENCHMARK LINE ON TOP OF THIS, SO THEY CAN SEE WHAT OUR CURRENT DISTRICT LINE LOOKS LIKE COMPARED TO THIS MAP.
THEN CHANGES -- CAN YOU -- YEAH, THERE WE GO.
SO A LOT OF THE CHANGE THAT OCCURRED TO DISTRICT NUMBER 6 TO ACQUIRE TERRITORY FROM DISTRICT 2 IN THE MOST NORTHERN REGIONS OVER NORTH OF -- THAT'S A TERRITORY THAT WE DISCUSSED IN GREAT DETAIL DURING THE LAUNCH MEETING.
WE REFINED THE PARTICULAR ELECTION PRECINCTS THAT WE WERE MOVING INTO THE PLAN, INTO THE DISTRICT.
WE A THINK THERE'S A MINOR CHANGE BETWEEN 2 AND -- NO.
WE HAVE A CHANGE BETWEEN 2 AND 5 IN THIS ONE? DREW? OR WE AVOIDED THAT?
>> I THINK WE AVOIDED THAT ONE, RIGHT.
>> THERE WERE A COUPLE OF MINOR SHIFTS SUGGESTED DURING THE MEETING WE HAD LAST WEEK -- LAST -- WHEN I WAS LAST WITH YOU.
IF WE GO OVER TO THAT SIDE OF THE COUNTY, PLEASE.
SO PRE UNDER THIS PLAN AS OUTLINED, PRECINCT 1059 WOULD BE ADDED TO DISTRICT 4.
DISTRICT 1 -- 1119 GOES FROM 7 INTO DISTRICT 4 -- NO.
>> DISTRICT 4 GIVES UP 1119 TO DISTRICT 7.
>> 1119 -- WHAT ARE THE STREETS BORDERING 1119, DREW?
>> I'M HAVING TROUBLE FINDING 1119.
WE'VE TAKEN 1084 OUT AND -- FROM
THOSE ARE THE TWO CHANGES TOTALLY THAT WE HAD AS A RESULT OF OUR EFFORTS THE LAST TIME AROUND AND TODAY.
ALL ACCOMPLISHED ON A -- PRECINCT LEVEL.
THE MINORITY PERCENTAGE NUMBERS IN THE DISTRICTS AS THEY EXIST HAVE NOT BEEN MATERIALLY ALTERED.
IN PARTICULAR, DISTRICT 6, WHICH WAS THE MOST UNDERPOPULATED, CONTINUES TO BE -- THE DISTRICT WITH THE HIGHEST HISPANIC MAJORITY.
THAT HISTORICALLY OCCURRED SINCE 1990 IN THE COUNTY.
SO IT'S MAINTAINING THAT PREDICTION.
[00:10:01]
YES MISS COMPTON.>> TRUSTEE: YOU WERE ASKING ABOUT 1119 AND I SEE 1119 NOW.
THE PRECINCT IN (INDISCERNIBLE) I THINK IT WAS 3500.
>> YEAH, SO IT'S SUNNYDALE HERE.
>> SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE AS OF THIS TIME.
ARE YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE TRIED OUT ON THIS MAP?
>> I HAD SPOKEN WITH Y'ALL ABOUT SWAPPING, I BELIEVE, IT WAS 1071.
>> 1071 FOR THE ONE THAT I HAD TAKEN FROM 3 LAST TIME, WHICH WOULD BE 1059.
I THINK WHEN WE DID THAT SWAP, THE PERCENTAGE STAYED ABOUT THE SAME.
I KNOW YOU ARE OKAY WIT PRECINCT, RIGHT?
>> REMEMBER 1059, THE ONE THAT IS BUCKNER?
IT WOULD KEEP THE DISTRICT MORE...
>> YOU WANT TO SEE THAT CONFIGURATION?
>> SO DREW, IF YOU WERE TO TAKE THAT ONE AND PUT IT BACK INTO 3.
THAT DONE BY ITSELF STILL ALLOWS THE DISTRICTS TO REMAIN UNDER THE 10% MAXIMUM DEVIATION ALLOWED BY LAW, OR IT CAN BE FURTHER ADJUSTED.
THEN, ADDING 1071 FROM 6 TO 4.
>> IT'S IN EAST DALLAS OFF NORTHEAST GRAND AND GASTON IS THERE, TOO.
>> DREW, CAN YOU GIVE US THE STREETS YOU HAVE YOUR CURSOR ON.
>> NORTH BROOKSIDE, EAST SIDE, AND LAVISTA DRIVE ON THE NORTH.
>> IF YOU KNOW WHERE THE COUNTRY CLUB IS, THAT'S THE GREEN AREA ON THE RIGHT.
>> WHAT DOES THAT DO TO MY NUMBERS?
>> WHAT DOES THAT DO TO HER NUMBERS? IT WOULD STAY -- IT WOULDN'T BE ALTERED.
>> LOOKING FROM -- I'M GOING TO MENTION FIRST FROM DISTRICT 6'S ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT, HISPANIC MEMBERS TOTAL POPULATION, 64.83% -- (SIMULTANEOUS SPEAKING)
>> IT IMPROVES YOUR NUMBER OF TOTAL HISPANIC PERCENTAGE UP TO 65.86%.
SO IT ACTUALLY HAS A BENEFICIAL EFFECT IN TERMS OF INCREASING HISPANIC PERCENTAGE OF DISTRICT 6.
>> IT DOES HELP -- OR IT DOES NOT DILUTE DISTRICT 6 IN ANY APPRECIABLE VALUE.
>> I DON'T SEE WHERE YOU'RE SAYING THAT.
[00:15:02]
>> DREW, IF YOU COULD PUT THE CURSOR ON THAT.
>> THAT NUMBER IS A LITTLE BETTER THAN IT WAS IF YOU HAD KEPT THAT DISTRICT -- THAT PRECINCT.
>> SO SINCE I'M THE MOST UNDERPOPULATED, THAT MEANS I'LL HAVE TO SPEAK LOUDER FOR MORE PEOPLE.
>> ACTUALLY, IT WORKS THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT A PERSON THAT LIVES IN YOUR DISTRICT, THEORETICALLY HAS A LARGER VOICE AT THE DAIS BECAUSE IT TAKES -- (LAUGHTER)
>> BECAUSE IT TAKES LESS PEOPLE --
>> TO ELECT A REPRESENT TO YOUR SEAT THAN AN APPRECIABLY LARGER DISTRICT.
>> I'VE GOT A FEELING YOU'VE GOTTEN THAT QUESTION BEFORE.
>> MOVE IT OUT WHERE IT SHOWS ALL OF THEM NOW.
I'M CURIOUS HOW MY ARM LOOKS NOW.
>> DREW, ZOOM OUT SO THAT WE CAN SEE A FULL VIEW OF THE COUNTY.
THE MAP WE HAVE ON THE WALL, EXCEPT FOR THE CHANGES WE JUST DID, THE MAP WE'VE GOT ON THE WALL HERE PROVIDES A GOOD OVERVIEW.
FOR EACH OF YOU FOR YOUR DISTRICT, WE HAVE THESE THAT ARE SITTING ON THE TABLE.
AT EACH DISTRICT'S TERRITORY, IS HIGHLIGHTED IN ONE.
YOU'VE SEEN THIS BEFORE AND THE ONES THAT WE'VE USED FOR THE ELECTIONS.
IF WE WOULD UPDATE THESE, OF COURSE, BUT I URGE YOU TO TAKE ONE OF THOSE WITH YOU AS IT PROVIDES A GOOD WAY TO STUDY YOUR TERRITORY MORE CAREFULLY BEFORE YOU ALL ADOPT.
I TH BE PLACE THIS ON THE AGENDA.
WE DO HAVE ONE OF US AVAILABLE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.
IF YOU NEED ANYTHING ELSE FROM US, WE HAVE SOMEBODY ON STAND-BY.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: OKAY.
ANYBODY HAVE COMMENTS, QUESTIONS?
>> TRUSTEE: WELL, THIS WASN'T TOO PAINFUL.
>> IT HAS BEEN THE MOST PLEASANT, EFFICIENT PROCESS WE'VE HAD.
>> I WANT TO SAY PART OF MY ANXIETY IS THE FACT TRUSTEE FLOR REPRESENTING CONSTITUENTS OF MY PRESENT DISTRICT IN AN EXEMPLARY FASHION.
>> IF YOU HAVE INFO, I APPRECIATE IT.
>> THAT'S THE DIFFICULTY IN A LOT OF THIS WORK IS EXPLAINING TO PEOPLE HOW THESE THINGS CHANGE, AND EDUCATING THE VOTER.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> CAN WE PRIORITIZE THE PROCESS OF GETTING THE HIGH RESOLUTION VERSIONS OF BOTH THE COUNTY-WIDE MAP AND DISTRICT MAPS UP AND AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE? (SPE MICROPHONE)
DREW, ARE YOU STILL -- CAN YOU STILL HEAR ME?
SO WHAT IS YOUR WORK SCHEDULE? AND DO YOU THINK BY TOMORROW WE COULD MAKE THAT CHANGE AND GET ALL OF THOSE THINGS HERE IN THE MORNING TOMORROW?
>> I'M BUSY THIS AFTERNOON, BUT I'M FREE TOMORROW MORNING, SO WE CAN PROBABLY GET IT OUT SOMETIME TOMORROW MORNING.
SO AS EARLY AS TOMORROW, CERTAINLY BEFORE THE WEEKEND BEFORE YOU HAVE YOUR MEETING NEXT WEEK.
>> WE WILL UPDATE THEM AS SOON AS WE RECEIVE THEM.
[00:20:02]
>> THOSE LINKS WERE PROVIDED, SO IT WOULD BE THE SAME LINKS.
WE'LL HAVE THE NEW MAPS ON THEM.
>> WE CAN PUT THE LINKS IN THE PUBLIC NOTICE FOR THE NEXT BOARD MEETING AS WELL, SO PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT LOOKING AT OUR AGENDA COULD ACCESS THE MAPS? GREAT.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL YOUR HELP WITH THIS.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: YOU'RE LIKE I WON'T BE HERE IN TEN YEARS.
>> I THINK WE SHOULD RECOGNIZE...
>> I'VE BEEN PRACTICING LAW FOR 42 YEARS NOW THIS NOVEMBER, AND MY WIFE IS INSISTENT THAT I DO SOMETHING ELSE FOR AWHILE.
SO WE'RE HEADED -- ON THE FILING DATE WHEN THIS -- ON THE JANUARY 19TH, FILING PERIOD OPENS, WE'LL BE HOPEFULLY LANDING IN SAN JOSE, COSTA RICA FOR THE REST OF THE WINTER.
>> HOW YOU SUFFER, HOW YOU SUFFER.
>> I'VE GOT TO LEARN HOW TO TIE FISHING KNOTS.
THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO BE FOCUSED ON AT THAT POINT.
IN 1990 I WORKED WITH ROBERT YOUNG AND WORKING WITH THE BOARD THEN.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: THANK YOU.
SO WE WILL NOW MOVE ONTO ITEM 7, DISCUSSION OF BOARD POLICIES RELATING TO STUDENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES AND TERM CONTRACTS.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: OKAY.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: WE WILL NOW RESUME THE MEETING
[7. Discussion of Board policies relating to Student Rights and Responsibilities and Term Contracts]
WITH ITEM 7.TRICIA, WOULD YOU LIKE TO LEAD OFF? OR MISS HORATIO.
WE'RE BACK WITH THE STUDENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES, HOPEFULLY FOR THE LAST TIME.
YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SPEAK LOUD.
SENIOR VICE PROVOST FOR ACADEMIC SERVICES.
YOU WERE GIVEN A PRESENTATION LAST MONTH THAT KIND OF OUTLINES THE PROCESS.
FIRST, WE'LL TAKE YOU THROUGH THE BACKGROUND ON HOW WE GOT HERE.
THEN, I WILL TAKE YOU THROUGH EACH OF THE RESPECTIVE PROCEDURES AND HOW THEY WORK IN PROCESS.
THEN, WE'LL DISCUSS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT DIFFERENT SANCTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED INTO THE POLICIES.
I'LL TURN IT OVER TO TRACY TO START.
THANK YOU FOR HAVING US HERE TODAY.
WHAT WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW IS HOW WE GOT HERE.
FIRST, I WANT TO LET EVERYONE KNOW THAT THIS WAS NOT DONE IN ISOLATION, BUT IT WAS DONE THROUGHOUT DALLAS COLLEGE.
>> THIS IS THE WRONG PRESENTATION.
>> WHICH ONE? (SPE MICROPHONE)
>> SO AS YOU COULD SEE, THIS WAS A COMMITTEE THAT WAS FORMED BEFORE THE SOC CAME ON CAMPUS TO ADDRESS THE NEED OF ONE STUDENT CONDUCT PROCESS THROUGHOUT DALLAS COLLEGE.
PRIOR TO THIS COMMITTEE AND OUR MEMBER STRUCTURE, THE PROCESS WAS DECENTRALIZED, SO MYSELF AND DR. MORRIS ASSEMBLED A COMMITTEE.
AS YOU COULD SEE, THERE WERE VARIOUS TASK FORCE SUBCOMMITTEES THAT ADDRESSED THE VARIOUS ISSUES OR AREAS THAT DEALT WITH STUD RESPONSIBILITIES.
>> SO IN OUR FORMER STRUCTURE, THE PROCESS WAS VERY DECENTRALIZED.
EACH CAMPUS HANDLED STUDENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES IN A VERY DIFFERENT MANNER.
AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE WAY THE RECORDS FOR STUDENT CONDUCT WAS
[00:25:03]
MANAGED WAS VERY DIFFERENT ON EACH CAMPUS.SO IN ORDER TO BRING US INTO COMPLIANCE WITH OUR ACREDITING BODY AS I STATED BEFORE, WE ASSEMBLED A DALLAS COLLEGE-WIDE COMMITTEE TO ADDRESS THE AREAS THAT WOULD BRING THE INSTITUTION INTO COMPLIANCE.
WITHIN THE NEW STRUCTURE, WHAT YOU WILL BEGIN TO SEE IS THAT WE USE A CENTRALIZED TECHNOLOGY TOOL CAUGHT MAXIANT.
INSIDE, WE HAVE ALL OF OUR CASES STORED THAT ANYONE WHO IS A USER INSIDE OF THIS SYSTEM COULD SEE THE CASES.
CAN YOU SPELL THAT? I DON'T SEE IT IN YOUR PRESENTATION.
THAT IS THE INDUSTRIAL STANDARD TOOL USED ACROSS THE NATION FOR HIGHER EDUCATION FOR STUDENT CONDUCT CASES.
THAT INFORMATION BRINGS IN AN A STUDENT CONDUCT OFFICER, WHO THEN ADDRESSES THE CASE AND ASSIGNS IT TO THE RESPECTIVE AREAS.
>> SO THE STUDENT FILES A GRIEVANCE ONLINE AND NOT DIRECTLY TO A PERSON?
>> THEY CAN WALK INTO THE OFFICE.
RIGHT NOW, UNDER THE NEW STRUCTURE WE HAVE CONDUCT OFFICERS ON EACH CAMPUS.
LET ME SAY CONDUCT OFFICERS ON EACH CAMPUS.
WE HAVE AN OFFICE DESIGNATED FOR STUDENTS RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES, SO THEY CAN WALK ON CAMPUS AS WELL AS FILE IT ONLINE WITH A TECHNOLOGY TOOL.
>> IS THIS SOMETHING AVAILABLE ON -- OR IS THAT NOT THE PURPOSE?
>> THAT WOULD SERVE A VERY DIFFERENT PURPOSE THAN THIS.
>> AND THIS IS -- I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THE PLATFORM FOR THIS PROBABLY NOT IMPORTANT AS TO WHAT IT IS, BECAUSE THAT COULD CHANGE AS THINGS NEED OVER TIME.
THE CONCEPT BEING THAT CAN DO THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY OR -- ONLINE.
>> TRUSTEE FLORES, TO YOUR POINT AS WELL, ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WITH NOT ONLY SOMETIMES CONDUCT BUT JUST GENERAL COMPLAINTS, THEY CAN BE AS MINIMAL AS I CAN'T GET TO THE BLACKBOARD OUR LMS THAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT POTENTIAL DISCRIMINATION.
TO Y THE ACADEMIC SIDE, THOSE ARE MANY TIMES IN THE DEAN'S OFFICE OR DEPARTMENT CHAIR OFFICE.
WHAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON DOING IS UTILIZING A MORE COMMON TOOL, SO THAT WE CAN TRACK OUR EFFECTIVENESS THROUGH THIS TOOL.
EVEN IF IT COMES IN ORGANICALLY THROUGH JUST A STUDENT POPPING INTO AN OFFICE.
OUR DEANS AND DEPARTMENT CHAIRS NOW ARE TRAINED TO BE ABLE TO GO AHEAD AND CREATE THAT IN THAT SYSTEM, SO THAT WE CAN TRACK HOW LONG IT TOOK US TO RESOLVE IT, WHAT THE TIMELINE WAS.
PROVIDE THE PORTAL FOR DOCUMENTATION.
REALLY ALLOWS US -- I THINK MAYBE ANNUALLY, WE CAN SPEAK TO THE BOARD ABOUT LOCALLY HOW WE'RE DOING AROUND STUDENT CONCERNS AND COMPLAINTS AS OPPOSED TO SOMETIMES ONE-OFF.
WHAT IS THIS SOFTWARE WHERE YOU BASICALLY CLOSE THE LOOP ON A GRIEVANCE?
>> SO AS TRACY INDICATED, THE POLICIES ARE DIVIDED INTO TWO DISTINCT CATEGORIES, RIGHT.
SO THERE'S THE STUDENT INITIATED POLICIES AND THE COLLEGE INITIATED POLICIES.
I WILL START THE OVERVIEW WITH THE STUDENT INITIATED POLICY.
SO SPECIFICALLY FLD, WHICH IS THE STUDENT GRIEVANCE PROCESS.
SO I THE EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE PROCESS IN THAT IT PROVIDES A PATH FOR RESOLUTION OF A COMPLAINT OR A CONCERN INITIATED BY A STUDENT IN WHICH THE STUDENT BELIEVE IT'S UNFAIR OR
[00:30:02]
THERE'S BEEN INEQUITABLE OR DISCRIMINATORY TREATMENT OR FEEL THEY'RE IN SOME OTHER WAY -- THEIR ACCESS TO EDUCATION HAS BEEN PUT INTO JEOPARDY.SO I EVERY ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE A STUDENT'S GRIEVANCE INFORMALLY WITH THE STUDENT CONTACTING THE INDIVIDUAL WHO IS THE SUBJECT OF THE COMPLAINT AND DISCUSSING THAT WITH THEM.
IF T STUDENT CONDUCT OFFICER WORKS WITH BOTH THE STUDENT AND THE EMPLOYEE TO HELP RESOLVE THE GRIEVANCE.
>> TRUSTEE: IS THERE A TIMELINE ON THE PROCESS AT EACH STEP?
>> NOT IN THE -- FOR THE OVERALL PROCESS, YES.
SO WE ATTE EVERYTHING WITHIN 30 DAYS' TIMELINE TYPICALLY.
IF IT'S GOING TO BE LONGER THAN THAT, WE WILL GIVE NOTICE OF EXTENSION OF TIME AND CAUSE FOR DELAY AND REASONABLE ANTICIPATED DATE OF RESOLUTION.
>> TRUSTEE: THE REASON I ASK THAT, WHAT IF THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR STEP ONE BUT NOT NECESSARILY STEP TWO AND EITHER ONE OF THEM SIT ON IT AND DON'T MOVE IT ALONG UNTIL YOU RUN THE CLOCK, WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO ASSURE THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN?
>> IN TERMS OF THE TIMELINE, EVERYONE IS PUT ON NOTICE OF THAT.
WHAT WE IDENTIFIED PREVIOUSLY AS AN ISSUE IS NOT EVERYONE WHO WAS ACTUALLY MANAGING THE STUDENT CONDUCT SYSTEM WAS TRAINED ON THE ACTUAL POLICIES.
IN T MEAN, THERE'S ASSOCIATE VICE CHANCELLOR WHO OVERSEES EVERYTHING IN TERMS OF STUDENT'S CONDUCT PROCESS.
THE STUDENT IS GIVEN NOTICE OF THE POLICY.
THEY WOULD MAINTAIN THE TIMELINE AS WELL.
AND THEY CAN FOLLOW UP WITH THE RESPECTIVE PARTIES AS NECESSARY.
AND PROCEDURE IS VIOLATED OR POLICY VIOLATED, WE WOULD TAKE ACTION ON THAT FROM A PERFORMANCE PERSPECTIVE.
>> TRUSTEE: THE REASON I ASK, BECAUSE THERE WAS A RECENT EXPERIENCE WITH SOMEONE FROM THE PUBLIC, WHERE THEY WERE PASSED ALONG FROM ONE EMPLOYEE TO ANOTHER, AND THEN, THE THIRD EMPLOYEE DIDN'T MOVE ON WHAT THEY NEEDED TO, SO THAT'S A CONCERN ABOUT PROCESSES AND TIMELINES TO MAKE SURE THAT WHOEVER IS IN THE SOFT HAND-OFF OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT, THE HAND-OFF, DOESN'T SIT ON SOMETHING.
THAT'S A MATTER OF COMMUNICATION, RIGHT.
SO SOMETIMES THERE ARE DELAYS FOR REASONS BEYOND OUR CONTROL.
WHEN WE KNOW THAT THAT IS OCCURRING, WE ARE REQUIRED TO RESPOND TO THE INDIVIDUAL AND GIVE THEM NOTICE OF THAT INFORMATION.
IN T A D M INISTRATIVELY, I THINK THAT'S ALSO A PERFORMANCE ISSUE.
SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS TRAIN EVERYBODY ON WHAT IS EXPECTED.
AND IF SOMETHING LIKE THAT HAPPENS, THEN, WE HAVE THE MEANS WITH WHICH TO ADDRESS THE PERFORMANCE.
>> AND TO ENSURE THERE'S QUALITY IN THE PROCESS MOVING ALONG.
I RECEIVE A REPORT ON A WEEKLY BASIS OF ALL CONDUCT CASES, WHERE THEY'RE AT IN THE PROCESS, WHEN THEY STARTED, TO ENSURE WE'RE MOVING AND WE HIT THAT 30-DAY DEADLINE.
>> TRUSTEE: WHAT ARE THE MOST COMMON GRIEVANCES OR FACT SCENARIOS YOU EXPECT IN THIS PROCESS, THIS ONE WE'RE LOOKING AT?
>> THE ACADEMIC SIDE THEY'RE MOSTLY GRADES.
PROBABLY LESSER ONES ARE ASPECTS AROUND PLAGIARISM.
THE GRADE DISPUTES ARE THE MOST COMMON COMING -- THAT ARE STUDENT GENERATED.
>> TRUSTEE: I'M RELATIVELY NEW IN HERE.
WHAT IS THE VOLUME OF ACTIVITY THAT WE SEE IN THIS THESE TWO CATEGORIES, THE RESOLVED INFORMALLY AND THOSE THAT WERE NOT OVER THE LAST 12 MONTHS? WHAT IS THAT?
>> WE RAN THE NUMBERS FOR -- ON THE ACADEMIC SIDE.
WE LAUNCHED THIS NEW PLATFORM IN -- ON SEPTEMBER 1ST.
ON THE ACADEMIC SIDE, PRIMARILY GRADE DISPUTES, I THINK WE HAD 67 TOTAL FROM SEPTEMBER 1ST UNTIL NOW.
WE TREAT ALL OF THEM COMING INTO THE ACADEMIC SIDE ORIGINALLY AS FORMALLY.
WITH FACULTY, WE ENCOURAGE THE STUDENT TO WORK WITH THE FACULTY MEMBER.
AS A DEFENSE, THE DEPARTMENT CHAIR MOST WELL AWARE OF THE FACULTY MEMBER AND THE DISCIPLINE, THEY WORK TOGETHER WITH THE STUDENT.
IF A GET RESOLVED, IT GOES TO A DEAN OR VICE PROVOST FOR MORE FORMAL REVIEW AND RESOLUTION.
ON THE STUDENT SUCCESS SIDE, WE'RE AVERAGING AROUND THAT AMOUNT.
BUT WE CAN GET YOU A MORE ACCURATE NUMBER AT A LATER DATE SO THAT WE CAN --
[00:35:04]
>> TRUSTEE: I DIDN'T KNOW IF IT'S HUNDREDS, THOUSANDS, 20, TEN.
YOU KNOW ON NONACADEMIC SIDES, HONESTLY, MOST GRIEVANCES RESULT OUT OF PEOPLE'S INTERACTIONS WITH EACH OTHER.
AS WE'VE BEEN REMOTE, THERE HAVEN'T BEEN MANY INTERACTIONS WITH FOLKS.
>> YOU TAKE AWAY THAT AND YOU TAKE AWAY HAVING BEEN ON RESIDENTIAL CAMPUSES, LET ME TELL YOU, YOU GET 60 A DAY.
YOU'VE GOT RESIDENCE HALLS AND ATHLETICS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
BUT NATURE OF OUR STUDENTS AND PARTICULARLY AS ADULTS, REALLY MINIMIZES THAT OCCURRING.
>> AS I SAID, IF RESOLUTION ISN'T POSSIBLE AT THE INFORMAL LEVEL, WE MOVE TO THE FORMAL PROCESS.
SO THE STUDENT CONDUCT OFFICER CONDUCTS AN INQUIRY INTO THE ISSUE AND RENDERS A DECISION.
IF T RESOLVE, THE STUDENT MAY APPEAL TO A DEAN.
THEN, THE FINAL LEVEL OF APPEAL IS WITH THE ASSOCIATE VICE CHANCELLOR OF STUDENT SUCCESS.
SO G DISPUTE PROCESS, WHICH I THINK IS THE LARGEST -- THE MAJORITY OF THE COMPLAINTS THAT COME IN.
THE RUNS IN A SIMILAR FASHION AS GRIEVANCE PROCESS.
THE EXPECTATION IS THAT THE STUDENT WILL WORK WITH THE INSTRUCTOR TO RESOLVE WHATEVER THE ISSUE MAY BE.
BUT IF THA THEN, THE DEPARTMENT CHAIR WORKS WITH THE STUDENT AND THE INSTRUCTOR TO RESOLVE IT.
FROM THE TO THE ACADEMIC DEAN AND THEN STILL IF WE DO DETERMINE A GRADE CHANGE IS NECESSARY AS A RESULT OF THE DISPUTE, THEN, THAT ISN'T MADE WITHOUT CONSULTING THE INSTRUCTOR.
THE INSTRUCTOR IS INFORMED THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.
ON THE ACADEMIC SIDE, THE FACULTY ROLE, WE TRY TO HONOR THE PRIVACY OF FACULTY WITHIN THE CLASSROOM.
IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US IN THIS PROCESS TO KIND OF RECOGNIZE THAT.
IN C A CHANGE OF GRADE HAPPENS, WHICH HAPPENS IN VERY RARE CASES, AGAIN, THERE'S A LOT OF ENGAGEMENT WITH THE FACULTY MEMBER, BECAUSE IT DOES INVOLVE AN OFFICIAL GRADE CHANGE AT THAT COURSE LEVEL.
>> WOULD YOU SAY, GREG, THE MOST TIMES YOU INTERVENE IS REALLY A MATHEMATICAL OR PROCEDURE ISSUE.
IF IT'S A CHANGE OF GRADE, IT'S THE FACULTY'S DECISION.
THE FEW CASES I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN -- IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN CONTINUALLY HELP FACULTY GET TRAINED ON -- WE RELY HEAVY ON THE SYLLABUS, TOO.
IF FACULTY RELIES ON SYLLABUS IN TERMS OF GRADING POLICIES, THAT HELPS RESOLVE THE MAJORITY EASILY.
SO THE STUDENT CONDUCT PROCESS IS A MORE COMPLEX PROCESS THAN THE ONES THAT WE'VE DISCUSSED SO FAR.
SO A BEGINS THE STUDENT CODE OF CONDUCT.
IT OUTLINES STUDENTS' RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITY AS THEY APPLY TO THEM AND THEIR STATUS AS STUDENTS.
IT I THE PRIVILEGES GUARANTEED TO THEM UNDER THE LAW.
AS WELL AS IT ALSO ADDRESSES THEIR OBLIGATIONS AND EXER PRIVILEGES.
TRUS I DISCUSSED YOUR CONCERNS.
IT WAS WITH RESPECT TO THOSE RIGHTS AND HOW WE CAN BETTER EMPHASIZE THE PROTECTIONS.
SOME OF THE LATEST REVISIONS TO THE POLICIES REALLY TRIED TO HIGHLIGHT THOSE PROTECTIONS.
BRINGING IN THE STANDARDS OF DUE PROCESS IN THE FLB CONTEXT AS WELL AS REFERENCES TO FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM.
>> FLB REFERS TO PROHIBITED CONDUCT.
WHICH IS HANDLED UNDER A DIFFERENT POLICY AND PROCEDURE.
AND THE DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS THAT ACCOMPANY SUCH CONDUCT, WHICH TRACY WILL DISCUSS LATER IN THE PRESENTATION.
ONCE NOTICE OF AN ALLEGED VIOLATION OF FLB, FM IS TRIGGERED.
AND SO FM WORKS IN RELATION TO FMA, THE HEARING PROCESS.
IT'S REALLY A TWO-TIER OR TWO-PHASED PROCESS.
[00:40:03]
SO A CONFERENCE.THE STUDENT WHO IS THE SUBJECT OF THE ALLEGATION RECEIVES NOTICE OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION AS WELL AS THE APPLICABLE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AND ANY DETAILS REGARDING THE ALLEGATION.
AN INVESTIGATOR IS ASSIGNED TO INVESTIGATE THE CONDUCT.
AS T THERE'S TWO STUDENT CONDUCT OFFICERS AT EVERY CAMPUS.
IDEALLY, WE WOULD HAVE A CONDUCT OFFICER AT A DIFFERENT CAMPUS INVESTIGATE THE CLAIMS TO AVOID ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN THAT REGARD.
ONCE CONCLUDED, THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONFERENCE IS CONDUCTED.
FROM STUDENT'S PARTICIPATION IN THE PROCESS.
OF THE ONCE THEY'VE BEEN GIVEN THE DISPOSITION OF THE CASE, THE STUDENT CAN ACCEPT WHATEVER THE OUTCOME IS, THE DETE RESPONSIBILITY.
AND THE SANCTIONS THAT ACCOMPANY THAT AND CHOOSE TO RESOLVE THE CASE.
IN WHICH CASE IT WOULD BE CLOSED, AND WE'D BE DONE.
IN A DISPUTE THE DECISION, RIGHT.
AND THEN, IF THE SANCTION THAT WOULD ACCOMPANY THAT VIOLATION IS LESS THAN SUSPENSION OR EXPULSION, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL UNDER THE POLICY AT FM.
IF THE SANCTION THAT WOULD ACCOMPANY IT IS MORE THAN THAT, IF IT'S -- INCLUDES SUSPENSION OR EXPULSION, IT TRIGGERS THE HEARING PROCESS, AND THAT'S WHEN WE TRIGGER FMA LOCAL.
UNDE CHOOSE TO APPEAL, THEY WOULD APPEAL TO THE ASSOCIATE VICE CHANCELLOR FOR STUDENT SUCCESS, AND THAT WOULD WRAP IT UP.
IF A TO BE NECESSARY, WE MOVE INTO THE HEARING PROCESS, WHICH INCLUDES A COMMITTEE.
A THREE-MEMBER COMMITTEE COMPROMISED OF MEMBERS OF THE STUDENT BODY, MEMBERS FROM THE ACADEMIC SIDE OF THE HOUSE AND STUDENT SUCCESS SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
IT'S A VOLUNTARY PROCESS THAT IS DETERMINED BY APPLICATION.
WE'RE LOOKING FOR FAMILIARITY WITH THE POLICIES, ABILITY TO THINK IMPARTIALLY AND WITHOUT BIAS.
AND WE WOULD BE TRAINING TO THE POLICIES TO HELP PEOPLE SHORE-UP THOSE SKILLS.
AFTER ASSEMBLED, THE HEARING NOTICE IS SENT ADVISING THE STUDENTS OF THEIR RIGHTS, RIGHTS TO CALL WITNESSES, RIGHTS TO BE ACCOMPANIED BY REPRESENTATIVE OR COUNSEL.
THAT'S WITHIN A LIMITED CAPACITY AS PERMITTED BY POLICY.
AND THE RIGHT TO PRESENT EVIDENCE AT THE HEARING.
AT THE H COMMITTEE WILL HEAR THE EVIDENCE, HAS THE ABILITY TO QUESTION ALL PARTIES INVOLVED, AND RENDERED A DECISION BASED ON PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE.
THIS TIME, THE STUDENT CAN APPEAL AGAIN ON A LIMITED BASIS.
WHETHER THE CONCLUSION IS INSISTENT WITH OR VIOLATION OF POLICY OR ERRONEOUS OR CAPRICIOUS IN NATURE.
ONCE AND DECISION IS ISSUED WITH RESPECT TO APPEAL, THE MATTER IS CONSIDERED CLOSED.
IN ALL RESPECTS, STUDENTS HAVE A RIGHT TO AIR THEIR GRIEVANCES BEFORE THE COURT AND THE COURT HAS A RIGHT TO STOP AND LISTEN.
>> TRUSTEE: WHO SITS ON THESE COMMITTEES?
>> IT DEPENDS ON WHO VOLUNTEERS AND WHO IS INTERESTED.
OFTENTIMES THERE ARE INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE COME FORWARD.
WE TRY TO KEEP A POOL OF STAFF MEMBERS AS WELL AS FACULTY OF STUDENTS SO WE CAN TRAIN THEM AHEAD OF TIME.
SOME POPULATION, IT'S OUR STUDENT LEADERS WHO WILL STEP FORWARD TO VOLUNTEER FOR THE COMMITTEE.
AND SOMEONE THAT IS RECOMMENDED ON THE ACADEMIC SIDE AS WELL AS THE STUDENT SUCCESS SIDE.
>> TRUSTEE: DOES THE STUDENT HAVE DISCOVERY RIGHTS PRIOR TO THE HEARING? CAN THEY TAKE DEPOSITION? I MEAN -- THIS IS A PROCESS.
HOW DO THEY COLLECT INFORMATION FROM INSIDE THE COLLEGE?
>> SO FIRST, WE TRY NOT TO HAVE IT RESEMBLE A COURT PROCEEDING, SO THERE IS NO DISCOVERY IN THAT SENSE.
[00:45:03]
BUT THE POLICY DOES ADDRESS DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION, SO THAT IS ALLOWED.SO T THOSE KIND OF THINGS ARE SHARED WITH THE STUDENT, SO THAT THEY'RE ON THE SAME LEVEL PLAYING GROUND AS THE COLLEGE.
IN A DURING THE ACTUAL HEARING PROCESS, THE STUDENT HAS THE ABILITY TO QUESTION JUST LIKE THE COLLEGE DOES.
IN THIS CASE, I BELIEVE IT'S THE STUDENT CONDUCT OFFICER WHO REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COLLEGE.
THE STUDENT HAS THE SAME OPPORTUNITIES AS THAT INDIVIDUAL DOES.
>> TRUSTEE: WHAT PERCENTAGE OF CASES ARE APPEALED?
LAST YEAR, WHEN WE HAD APPROXIMATELY THREE CASES THAT WERE APPEALED.
BECAUSE AS GREG STATED, MOST OF THE CASES ARE RESOLVED INFORMALLY.
SO MOST OF THE CASES DO NOT EVEN PROCEED OR GET TO THE HEARING LEVEL.
>> I WAS WONDERING, I GRADES ARE ONE OF THOSE THINGS THE MOST CONTENDED FOR -- SHOULD WE SAY COMPLAINT, HOW DO WE GO FORWARD WITH THAT IF AN INSTRUCTOR SAYS YOU MADE A 60 ON YOUR FIRST TEST, 30 ON YOUR SECOND TEST.
YOU SO FAR MADE NOTHING BETTER THAN THAT ON ANYTHING ELSE, HOW DO YOU GET AN A? LOTS INSTRUCTORS, IF THEY'VE HAD 14 STUDENTS WITH A PROBLEM BUT THEY HAVE THE RECORDS AND THE GRADES -- I WORRY ABOUT THE INSTRUCTORS FOR THE MOST PART, BECAUSE I HAVE A BROTHER-IN-LAW WHO LEFT TWU AS A TENURED PROFESSOR, BECAUSE HE GOT TIRED OF HAVING THE WOMEN COME IN CRYING IN HIS OFFICE TO GET A BETTER GRADE.
SO A WHAT I KNOW FROM ACADEMIA, I WOULD WORRY ABOUT THE REPRESENTATIONS OF THE INSTRUCTORS.
HE WAS COMPUTER SOMETHING, SOMETHING.
AS IT WAS, THE FOLKS WHO CAME IN EVIDENTLY WERE LOOKING FOR AN EASIER CLASS THAN WHAT THEY SIGNED UP FOR.
THAT'S NOT WHAT HE WAS TEACHING, SO THAT WAS THAT PROBLEM.
BUT YOU HAVE A LOT OF COMPLAINTS ON ONE OR TWO INSTRUCTORS, IS THAT GOING TO PERHAPS PUT A PRESSURE ON THE INSTRUCTORS?
WE REALLY DO -- THAT'S WHY I DO THINK I LIKE THE WAY WE'VE APPROACHED THIS POLICY, IS BECAUSE ACADEMIC MATTERS TO YOUR POINT, PARTICULARLY GRADING, THERE'S INTEGRITY PIECE OF THIS, PARTICULARLY FOR FACULTY.
WE K VERY SAME POINT IN TWO VEINS.
ONE, WE FOCUS ON HELPING TO TRAIN FACULTY HOW BEST TO PREPARE THEIR OWN MATERIALS, THEIR SYLLABUS, THE WAY THEY'RE GRADING AS CLEAR AND CONCISE AS POSSIBLE THAT LEAVES LITTLE ROOM FOR SUBJECTIVE MEASURES.
TO Y IT A HABIT OF LOOKING AT TRACKING FACULTY FOR HOW MANY COMPLAINTS, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY GET.
THAT'S ALSO A REAL IMPORTANT PIECE.
IT REALLY DOES GO BACK TO, YOU KNOW -- OF COURSE, WE NEVER WANT TO -- IF THERE ARE LEGITIMATE ISSUES IN A COURSE THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS, THAT'S ONE THING.
BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE ARE AGAIN RESPECTING THE PRIVACY OF THE FACULTY IN THAT SPACE IS REALLY IMPORTANT.
THAT TOO WHY MANY TIMES DON'T WANT TO, BUT WE START WITH HOW HAVE YOU ADDRESSED THIS WITH THE INSTRUCTOR? AND IT'S MORE THAN JUST SIMPLY AN EMAIL TO THE INSTRUCTOR, I DON'T LIKE MY GRADE.
WILL YOU CHANGE IT? WE REALLY DO ASK THE STUDENTS TO TAKE A LEVEL OF RESPONSIBILITY IN A COLLEGIAL WAY TO RECONCILE THAT FIRST.
>> YOU MENTIONED SYLLABUS IN YOUR RESPONSE TO TRUSTEE ZIMMERMANN.
DO WE HAVE A SYLLABUS TEMPLATE THAT WE OFFER FACULTY?
WE'RE RIGHT NOW EXPLORING A PLATFORM THAT WILL ALLOW US TO STREAMLINE TO MAKE SURE
[00:50:03]
THERE ARE CHECK BOXES THAT EVERY SYLLABUS HAS.IT ALLOWS THE INSTRUCTOR TO GO IN MAKE FIXED ASPECTS.
WE DON'T HAVE A SYLLABUS MISSING A CRITICAL BIT OF GRADING INFORMATION OR POLICY.
>> TRACY WILL TAKE US OVER THE SANCTIONS PORTION.
>> SO WITH THIS NEW PROCESS, WHAT WE LOOKED AT WERE OUR SANCTIONS.
OFTENTIMES IN THE FORMER STRUCTURE, WE WENT TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS.
WE STILL HAVE ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS, BUT FOR SITUATIONS THAT ARE LESS THAN EXPULSION OR SUSPENSION, BUT WE'VE ADDED EDUCATION SANCTIONS.
THOSE ARE ALTERNATIVE SANCTIONS TO FOSTER STUDENT LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT.
UNDERNEATH THE EDUCATION SANCTIONS YOU CAN SEE WE'RE LOOKING AT COMMUNIT EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS, ACTIVITIES, PROJECTS.
SO THAT THE STUDENTS CAN LEARN FROM THEIR EXPERIENCES AS WELL AS MANDATORY COUNSELING.
BECA IN SOME OF OUR CASE SOCIAL SECURITY THAT SOME OF OUR STUDENTS NEED HELP.
THAT'S WHERE WE COME IN WITH THE BASIC NEEDS AS WELL AS THE COUNSELING COMPONENT.
COUNSELING AS WELL AS JUST MEETING WITH THEIR INSTRUCTOR IF IT'S ON THE ACADEMIC SIDE OR MEETING WITH THE OTHER STUDENT TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE IN A MORE FORMALIZED MANNER.
AND SANCTIONS, THE STUD OFFICER/COMMITTEE TAKES INTO CONSIDERATION THE VIOLATION.
THAT INCLUDES THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS, SANCTION GUIDELINES THAT WE FOLLOW, PRIOR DISCIPLINARY HISTORY, WHICH WE CAN LOOK UP.
AS WELL AS THE INDIVIDUAL STUDENTS' NEEDS TO MAKE IT A FAIR AND EQUITABLE PROCESS.
>> HOW MANY STUDENT CONDUCT OFFICERS DO WE HAVE?
>> IS IT BASICALLY SET UP IN TWO PER CAMPUS?
>> I THINK WHEN YOU INITIALLY STARTED THE PRESENTATION, YOU TALKED ABOUT MORE THAN JUST THE STUDENT CONDUCT OFFICERS.
I THINK YOU TALKED ABOUT THREE DIFFERENT POSITIONS RELATED TO STUDENT CONDUCT.
>> WE DO HAVE OTHER POSITIONS.
WE HAVE A DIRECTOR, WHO IS A ACTUALLY OVER THE STUDENT RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITY OFFICE, WHICH WE NEVER HAD BEFORE.
WE HAVE DEDICATED STAFF WHO GO THROUGH RIGOROUS TRAINING SO WE CAN ENSURE WE'RE FOLLOWING POLICIES, AND THEY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING WHEN THEY COME TO THIS AREA OF STUDENT CONDUCT.
AND ASSOCIATE DEAN, WHO IS OVER THIS AREA, AS WELL AS THE DEAN THAT OPERATE AND ENSURE THE PROCESS IS MOVING ALONG.
AND DESK, WHERE I'M BRIEFING THE REPORTS ON A WEEKLY BASIS TO ENSURE WE'RE MOVING ALONG, AND THE STAFF HAS WHAT THEY NEED AS WELL AS OUR STUDENTS.
>> TRACY, WHAT KIND O COMMUNITY SERVICE SANCTIONS ARE WE IMPOSING? WHERE WOULD THE STUDENTS GO TO PERFORM COMMUNITY SERVICE? WHO DOES THE MANDATORY COUNSELING?
>> THE MANDATORY COUNSELING, THE STUDENT CONDUCT OFFICER DOES THE MANDATORY COUNSELING.
THEN, WE ALSO ARE BUILDING A MENTORSHIP PROCESS FOR THOSE STUDENTS, BECAUSE THIS IS EDUCATIONAL, RIGHT.
THEN WE HAVE SO MANY PROGRAMS THAT TAKE PLACE INSIDE OF STUDENT LIFE.
WE HAVE THE LEADERSHIP INSTITUTION.
THE WE HAVE OUR MOBILE FOOD DRIVES, FOOD PANTRIES, WHERE STUDENTS CAN GO AND VOLUNTEER OR DO COMMUNITY SERVICE WITH OUR FOOD PANTRIES AS WELL AS THE FOOD DRIVES.
SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE AREAS THAT WE WORK WITH.
THEN PARTNERS THAT WE HAVE RELATIONSHIPS WITH.
>> SO WITH THE EDUCATIONAL SANCTIONS, WHAT THIS IS DOING IS ACTUALIZING OUR MISSION OF DALLAS COLLEGE AND THE BENEFITS OF THE SANCTIONS IS TO PROVIDE THE SUPPORTIVE ENVIRONMENT, TEACH LIFE SKILLS THAT INCLUDE SOFT, INTERPERSONAL, AND COMMUNICATION SKILLS, LIFELONG LEARNING, AS WELL AS PSYCHOSOCIAL WELLBEING OF STUDENTS.
THES ALIGN WITH FOSTERING EQUITY, DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION FOR EMPLOYEES AND STUDENTS, STREAM LINES AND SUPPORTS NAVIGATION TO AND THROUGH COLLEGE AND BEYOND.
[00:55:02]
AND THEN, IT ALSO IMPACTS OUR INCOME DISPARITY THROUGHOUT OUR COMMUNITY AS WELL AS STRENGTHENS THE CAREER CONNECTED LEARNING NETWORK AND IMPLEMENTS THE STUDENT-CENTRIC ONE COLLEGE ORGANIZATION.ARE THERE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT WE CAN ANSWER FOR YOU?
>> IT'S GOOD TO HAVE IT LAID OUT IN THIS FORMAT.
MAKES IT MUCH EASIER TO UNDERSTAND VERSUS READING A LOT OF WORDS.
>> THANKS TO ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR WORK.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: OKAY.
SO THERE IS NOT AN EXECUTIVE SESSION NEEDED AT THIS MEETING.
SO WITH THAT, AT 3:08:00 P.M., THE MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
OH, SO THE MEETING IS NOT ADJOURNED.
DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSIONS ON ANYTHING?
>> THE FACULTY CONTRACT POLICY WAS IN OUR PACKET, IS THERE ANYTHING WE NEED TO DO TODAY? IS THIS THE FIRST READING? (SPE MICROPHONE)
>> THIS IS THE SECOND READING?
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: SO WE CAN HAVE DISCUSSION AT THAT MEETING?
>> YEAH, WE JUST PUT IT BACK OUT THERE IN CASE THERE WERE QUESTIONS, BUT THERE HAD BEEN NONE.
>> CAN I ASK ONE? I THINK PAGE 3 OR 4, IT REFERS TO THE ABILITY OF THE DISTRICT TO, QUOTE, WIND DOWN A MULTIYEAR CONTRACT.
IT'S UNCLEAR WHAT THAT TERM MEANS.
DOES THAT MEAN WE CAN UNILATERALLY REDUCE THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT? IF THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS, SHOULD WE SAY THAT INSTEAD OF WIND DOWN.
>> IT'S A COMMON TERM THAT I THINK BOTH FACULTY AND ADMINISTRATION UNDERSTANDS.
BUT MAYBE WE NEED A PARENTHETICAL STATEMENT.
>> WE HAD HAD DISCUSSION ON WHETHER THE MULTIYEAR CONTRACT WOULD BE FOR TWO OR THREE YEARS.
OF THE IN HERE IT SAYS UP TO THREE YEARS.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WERE IN AGREEMENT AS A BOARD, BECAUSE THERE WERE SOME OF US THAT WERE ADVOCATING FOR TWO YEARS.
SO I'M KIND OF CONCERNED THAT YOU BROUGHT IT BACK, SAYING UP TO THREE YEARS WITHOUT LETTING US MAKE THAT DECISION.
>> THE STATE LAW PERMITS MULTIYEAR CONTRACTS FOR FACULTY.
WE CAN CERTAINLY ASSURE THE BOARD OF THAT.
IN TERMS OF WHAT THE TERMS SHOULD BE, WHETHER IT'S TWO, THREE OR SOMETHING OTHER THAN THAT, THAT WOULD BE A DETERMINATION THE BOARD COULD MAKE.
WITH JUDGMENT FOR THAT OR THE BOARD, WE MAY FIND THE PROCEDURE -- OR FIND IT ADVI CIRCUMSTANCES THE FACULTY MEMBER WOULD BE ALLOWED TO A TWO-YEAR MULTIYEAR.
AND UNDER OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD BE.
IT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE A THREE-YEAR MULTIYEAR CONTRACT.
WE SAID UP TO THREE BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WAS IN THE POLICY BEFORE, AND WE DIDN'T CHANGE THAT.
>> YEAH, AGAIN, AS I STATED PREVIOUSLY, MY CONCERN IS THE TAXPAYER.
IF WE REALLY HAVE A FACULTY MEMBER THAT NEEDS TO BE EXITED BASED ON EVALUATIONS, BASED ON PERFORMANCE, WHATEVER IT IS THAT'S SET OUT, WE DON'T
[01:00:01]
WANT TO PROLONG IT AND IT NEEDS TO BE CLEAR VERSUS WE PROLONG, AND THEN, WE END UP COSTING THE TAXPAYER WHEN WE SHOULDN'T.>> I WOULD ADVOCATE FOR TWO YEARS.
I GUESS REALLY THE DIFFERENCE WOULD BE NORMALLY I GUESS THE NORMAL WIND-DOWN UNDER A THREE-YEAR WOULD BE TWO YEARS.
THE NORMAL WIND-DOWN UNDER A TWO-YEAR WOULD BE ONE YEAR.
>> THAT'S THE POINT YOU'RE MAKING.
>> ONE THING WITH THA LANGUAGE, UP TO THREE YEARS, WOULD PERMIT A DURATION OF SHORTER THAN THREE YEARS.
BUT WHEN IT HAS UP TO THREE YEARS, IT'S GOING TO BE INTERPRETED AS THREE YEARS, AND WHY DID YOU SAY UP TO? I'M IN MY SECOND YEAR, AND NOW YOU'RE TELLING ME I CAN'T.
>> WE TAKE DIRECTION FROM THE BOARD.
IF THE BOARD'S DESIRE IS TO HAVE LANGUAGE WE WOULD CHANGE IT AT THE BOARD'S DIRECTION.
>> IT SEEMS LIKE THE POLICY RATIONAL FOR TWO OR THREE YEARS IS TO DO SOMETHING MORE THAN ONE YEAR.
TO RECOGNIZE OUTSTANDING FACULTY AND RETAIN THEM.
I GU CHANCELLOR, IS A TWO-YEAR TERM SUFFICIENT RECOGNITION? I MEAN THREE-YEAR IS BETTER.
THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT STATEMENT.
IF WE WANT -- WE'RE GIVING YOU THE MAXIMUM POLICY TO RECOGNIZE YOUR OUTSTANDING SERVICE OF TEACHING.
THAT'S IN LINE WITH WHAT OTHER COLLEGES ARE DOING, RIGHT? WHAT DO YOU THINK?
>> WELL, IT'S THREE YEARS -- IF I DISAGREED, I WOULD HAVE SAID THAT.
>> QUITE FRANKLY, YOU'VE GOT AN OUTSTANDING FACULTY MEMBER, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE IN THIS SITUATION.
ANOT FACULTY TYPICALLY DO NOT LEAVE.
WE'RE SUCH A BAD INSTITUTION THAT THEY STAY WITH US FOREVER.
YOU KNOW? SO ON THOSE THAT WE DO HAVE TO EXIT, WHY PROLONG IT? WHY PROLONG IT? IN M BASICALLY, AGAIN -- EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT A ROLLING THREE-YEAR, WE'RE BASICALLY KEEPING THE SAME SYSTEM THAT WE HAVE NOW.
THAT'S HOW IT WILL BE INTERPRETED.
LET'S JUST GET IT DONE AND GET IT DONE.
>> IF YOU'RE MOVING FROM OUT OF STATE OR TAKING A JOB THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MOVE YOUR FAMILY, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE A JOB FOR TWO YEARS.
AGAIN, IF YOU'RE AN EXCELLENT FACULTY MEMBER, DOING A GOOD JOB, WE WOULD BE INSANE TO EXIT THEM.
AND THEY WOULD KNOW THAT, TOO.
>> I GUESS WHAT YOUR WHERE'S SAYING, THE LANGUAGE ALLOWS FOR ONE-YEAR CONTRACTS, TWO-YEAR CONTRACTS, THREE-YEAR CONTRACTS.
SO IT GIVES FLEXIBILITY OF BEING ABLE TO USE WHATEVER THEY THINK IS APPROPRIATE FOR THAT EMPLOYEE.
IT'S NOT SAYING -- IT'S NOT A BLANKET.
>> POLIC DEVELOPMENT OF REGULATION THAT WOULD ACCOMPANY THE POLICY THAT WOULD DEFINE WHEN SOMEONE IS ELIGIBLE FOR ONE, TWO, OR THREE YEARS.
SO IT WOULD NEVER BE LEFT UP TO, YOU KNOW, JUST SPECULATION.
>> IF I COULD, THERE ARE REALLY THREE PIECES OF THIS PROCESS.
THE FIRST IS THE HIRING OF THE INDIVIDUAL, WHICH WE OFTEN SPECIFY BY PROCEDURE A MAXIMUM.
WELL, I GUESS MAXIMUM OF TWO ON THE USUALLY INITIAL FACULTY HIRES.
>> EXISTING POLICY IT'S TWO-YEAR.
>> YOU'VE GOT THE HIR THAT'S THERE.
THEN WE HAVE THE EVALUATION FOR RETAINING THAT INDIVIDUAL, WHICH IS WHERE THE MULTIYEAR COMES IN.
ONE WE EVALUATE WHETHER OR NOT THEY FIT WITH US.
WE RETAIN THEM WITH THE GOAL BEING FOREVER FRANKLY.
THAT'S THE GOAL WE RETAIN PEOPLE.
THE UNFORTUNATELY IF SOMETHING HAPPENS AFTER THAT, AND WE NEED TO SEPARATE, THEN WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE FOR REMOVING SOMEONE WHO IS NO LONGER EFFECTIVE IN THE CLASSROOM AND MEETING THE NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS OF EITHER US OR STUDENTS IN THAT PROCESS? SO R THREE-YEAR REALLY CONFLATES THOSE LAST TWO BY COMBINING TOGETHER THE ISSUE TO SOME DEGREE OF AWARDING MULTIYEAR AND IT GETS INTO THE SEPARATION PIECE.
MY R SEPARATE THOSE IN IT PROCEDURE AND PRACTICE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
[01:05:01]
>> CAN WE BE ASSURED THAT IF GOING FORWARD UNDER YOUR GUIDELINES ONE, TWO, THREE POSSIBILITY, THAT WE'LL HAVE A FEEDBACK OF INFORMATION THAT WOULD, FOR EXAMPLE, GIVE EXAMPLES TO ASSURE US THAT THERE ARE ACTIONS BEING TAKEN ON THOSE WHO SHOULD NOT HAVE GONE THREE? HOW DO WE GET THE FEEDBACK?
>> I THINK -- (SIMULTANEOUS SPEAKING)
>> THE EXPECTATIONS AT THE TIME THAT THE BOARD DELEGATED AUTHORITY TO THE CHANCELLOR TO MAKE HIRING DECISIONS IN THE COLLEGE, IT WAS THERE WOULD BE REGULAR REPORTING TO THE BOARD ON THE HIRINGS AND ACTIONS THEY TAKE.
I FIND THIS CONSISTENT WITH THAT.
IN OTHER WORDS, REPORTING BACK TO THE BOARD THAT SAYS IF THE PROCEDURE ALLOWED FOR ONE, TWO, THREE-YEAR CONTRACTS, THIS MANY PEOPLE WERE ENTITLED TO A TWO-YEAR CONTRACT.
THIS MEAN AWARDED A THREE-YEAR CONTRACT.
THE CHANCELLOR OFFICE WOULD MAKE THE REPORTS TO THE BOARD.
>> MY POINT IS WITH RESPECT TO THE COMMENTS -- THEN, NOTHING SAYS THAT WE CAN'T A YEAR FROM NOW CHANGE THIS POLICY IF WE'RE MONITORING AND WE'RE NOT SEEING -- OR TWO YEARS OR YEAR AND A HALF OR WHATEVER, AND WE'RE NOT SEEING WHAT YOU ARE SAYING COULD BE HAPPENING, AND SHE'S CONCERNED, THEN, WE CAN TIGHTEN THE RESTRICTIONS.
>> THE BOARD CAN ALWAYS REVISIT THAT ASPECT OF THE POLICY, CERTAINLY.
THE REMIND, IT'S THE ISSUE THAT WE -- THE KIND OF PROBLEM WE FACE WITH ROLLING THREE-YEAR CONTRACTS, THAT A PERSON UNDER CONTRACT HAS A VESTED PROPERTY RIGHT IN THE CONTRACT FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT.
IF T A YEAR OR TWO, THOSE PEOPLE UNDER CONTRACT WOULD HAVE A VESTED RIGHT IN THE CONTRACT FOR THE TERM THAT IT EXISTED UNDER THAT CONTRACT.
>> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A PROVISION IN THIS POLICY THAT SAYS IF YOU COME UNDER CONTRACT, WE ARE GOING TO HONOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT WHATEVER THAT MAY BE.
>> WITH THOSE GOING INTO THE NEW POLICY OR PROCESS, WE WILL BE ABLE TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT MANAGEMENT HAS TAKEN THAT TYPE OF ACTION WITH AN INAPPROPRIATE TEACHER?
IF THE BOARD DOESN'T SEE THE RESPONSIVENESS OF MANAGEMENT, THE BOARD CAN REVISIT THAT.
>> HOW ARE WE ABLE TO SEE WHAT YOU JUST SAID?
>> I THINK IT WOULD BE IN THE REALM OF REPORTS FROM THE CHANCELLOR'S OFFICE ON PROCEDURE AND HOW IT WAS BEING IMPLEMENTED.
AND CERTAINLY, ANECDOTALLY, AS THE BOARD RECEIVES INFORMATION ABOUT INSTANCES THAT COME UP, IF YOU'RE SEEING THAT WE HAVE AN HIGH NUMBER OF PEOPLE RELIEVED FROM THEIR DUTIES OF THREE-YEAR CONTRACT -- I'M SURMISING THAT MIGHT BE A SCENARIO, OUR EXPECTATIONS IS, AS THE CHANCELLOR SAID, WHEN WE HIRE, WE INTEND THEM TO BE WITH US A LONG TIME.
THE POLICY, IF YOU MEET CERTAIN EXPECTATIONS AND MEET YOUR EVALUATION, THAT YOU WOULD BE AWARDED, REWARDED AND AWARDED A MULTIYEAR CONTRACT.
THE PURPOSE IS RETAIN HIGHLY QUALIFIED FACULTY.
>> AS A MATTER OF LAW, IF WE DISAVOW THE CREATION OF ANY PROPERTY RIGHT AND THE EMPLOYEE IN OUR POLICY AND IF WE HAVE THAT LANGUAGE IN THE CONTRACT WHICH THEY SIGNED, THERE'S NO COURT THAT WOULD RESURRECT PROPERTY RIGHT IN A THREE-YEAR CONTRACT, CORRECT?
>> WELL, I THINK THAT THE LAW PROVIDES THAT YOU HAVE A VESTED RIGHT IN A CONTRACT FOR THE TERM OF THAT CONTRACT.
I DON'T THINK WE CAN -- I DON'T THINK BY LAW WE CAN DISAVOW --
>> THAT'S WHAT OUR POLICY SAYS -- (SIMULTANEOUS SPEAKING)
>> IT'S BEYOND THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT.
>> BEYOND THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT.
YOU HAVE A VESTED PROPERTY RIGHT -- I CAN'T CALL ON A SUPREME COURT CASE.
THERE'S A SUPREME COURT CASE THAT HAS A PROPERTY RIGHT FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT.
>> THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT A CONTRACT.
>> GIVEN THAT, THE WAY THE POLICY IS WORDED NOW AND THE DISTRICT CAN, QUOTE, WIND DOWN A CONTRACT, ARE WE TO READ THAT -- SOMEBODY GETS A THREE-YEAR CONTRACT THAT CREATES A PROPERTY RIGHT.
SUBSEQUENT TO THE CONTRACT BEING CREATED FOR GOOD, BAD OR NO REASON, WE CAN REDUCE THE TERM TO TWO YEARS OR ONE YEAR ON OUR OWN.
AND DIMINISH THE VALUE OF THAT EMPLOYEE CONTRACT PROPERTY RIGHT.
THE DISTRICT HAS THE ABILITY TO DO THAT, RIGHT?
>> IT'S WHAT WE PROPOSED IN THIS POLICY.
WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT TO SEE IF IT'S ENFORCEABLE OR NOT.
[01:10:02]
TRUSTEE RITTER RAISED THE IMPLICATION.>> I'M TRYING TO ADDRESS TRUSTEE FLORES'S CONCERN.
IF WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO REDUCE A TERM, THE TAXPAYERS ARE PROTECTED.
THIS DOESN'T CONTEMPLATE CAUSE.
THIS IS WIND-DOWN IS NOT FOR CAUSE.
>> I MEAN, RITTER'S POINT, THAT WOULD BE A MID-CONTRACT TERMINATION AND DUE PROCESS RIGHTS WOULD ATTACH TO THAT.
IT WOULDN'T BE SOMETHING -- THEY WOULD NOT HAVE PROTECTIONS IN PLACE.
IN T LANGUAGE, THIS CONTEMPLATES REDUCED LOAD.
IN PRACTICE, THE WAY WE'VE USED IT IS WITH RESPECT TO THE ROLLING THREE.
IT EXTENDS THE CONTRACT OUT EACH YEAR.
WHAT WE'VE DONE IS ESSENTIALLY USED IT TO STOP THE EXTENSION AND SAY WE WILL HONOR YOUR CONTRACT THROUGH THE DURATION OF THE TERMS. IF I WHENEVER IT WAS ISSUED LAST.
>> WE WON'T AUTOMATICALLY ADD ANOTHER YEAR.
>> WHAT IS THE CONTRACT LANGUAGE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO USE SO THAT FACULTY COMPLETELY UNDERSTANDS THIS IS NOT AUTOMATIC? YOU'RE NOT GOING TO RENEW, RENEW, AND IF YOU'RE NOT PERFORMING, AT YOUR TWO OR AT YOUR YEAR ONE, YOU'RE GONE.
>> THAT LANGUAGE IS IN THIS PROPOSED POLICY.
IT CONTEMPLATES THE EVALUATION.
>> IS IT THE RENEWAL? PAGE 50 OF 53?
>> PAGE 50 AND IT'S RIGHT ON THE SECOND PARAGRAPH UNDER FULL-TIME FACULTY.
>> IS IT THE ONE WHERE IT SAYS RENEWAL?
>> A FACULTY MEMBER WHO HAS RENDERED HIGH QUALITY SERVICES TO THE COLLEGE DISTRICT AS DETERMINED BY THE MOST RECENT FACULTY EVALUATION OBTAINED THROUGH THE COLLEGE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM MAY BE OFFERED A MULTIYEAR CONTRACT FOR A TERM OF UP TO THREE YEARS IN ACCORDANCE WITH DALLAS COLLEGE PROCEDURES.
>> IT'S MAY WHICH IS DISCRETIONARY.
>> AS TEN YEARS AS AN EMPLOYEE, 25, GOING 26 YEARS AS A BOARD MEMBER, THOSE THINGS DON'T HAPPEN.
WHATEVER HAPPENS WITH FACULTY, YOU CAN'T TOUCH IT.
SO THIS IS OUR ONLY OPPORTUNITY NOW BASED ON EVERYTHING THAT WE'VE DONE, ALL THE PAIN THAT WE'VE BEEN THROUGH IN THIS TRANSITION -- OF COURSE THAT PAIN DIDN'T TOUCH FACULTY.
IT'S TOUCHED ADMINISTRATORS AND SUPPORT STAFF.
AND NOW, WE'RE GOING TO BRING THE BAG INTO THE NEW OR THE OLD INTO THE NEW.
YOU'RE SAYING NO AND WE MAY AND WHATEVER AND WHATEVER.
FACULTY ARE GOING TO SEE IT THE OTHER WAY AND ADMINISTRATORS ARE GOING TO BE -- BECAUSE THEY HAVE IN THE PAST.
AND WE'RE GOING TO BE STUCK WITH THAT FACULTY.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: TRUSTEE ZIMMERMANN.
>> IF I MIGHT, THE NEXT SENTENCE IS SOMETHING TELLING.
NOTHING CONTAINED HEREIN -- RECOMMENDATION OF A CONTRACT TERM OF LESS THAN THREE YEARS FOR ANY SUCH FACULTY MEMBER.
>> I REALLY THINK WHEN YOU MAKE CHANGES OF STOPPING THE ROLLING THREE, I THINK MANAGEMENT IS DESERVING OF AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEMONSTRATE WHETHER THEY WILL ENFORCE THE VALUE OF THAT CHANGE.
THAT VALUE OF THAT CHANGE IS THAT YOU'RE STILL GIVING THEM THE OPTION OF AWARDING THOSE THAT HAVE DEMONSTRATED THE DESERVING OF THREE, BUT I THINK DIANA IS GOING TO WANT TO SEE -- SHE KNOWS BETTER THAN I OR ANYBODY OWE SHE'S BEEN HERE.
THERE ARE GOING TO BE SOME NOT DESERVING.
IF WE GET THIS BACK IN A YEAR, AND WE DON'T SEE ANYBODY GET ANYTHING BUT THREE YEARS, I THINK HER POINT IS GOING TO BE VERY WELL TAKEN.
AND WE CHANGE THAT POLICY THEN, IF WE HAVE DOCUMENTED PROOF OF WHAT SHE'S TELLING US THAT HAS HAPPENED IN THE PAST AND OUR WAYS HAVE NOT CHANGED.
>> I WOULD RATHER TAKE CARE OF IT NOW.
>> BUT WE'RE -- YOU'RE NOT GIVING MANAGEMENT A CHANCE TO EXERCISE THE CHANGE WE'VE MADE.
[01:15:02]
I WOULD FEEL THEY'RE DESERVING AT LEAST A YEAR.HOW HAPPEN IN A YEAR THAT WE CAN'T FIX 12 MONTHS FROM NOW?
>> I JUST AM GOING ON -- HOW MANY YEARS HAVE WE BEEN? 55 YEARS (INAUDIBLE).
>> I'M TALKING HOW LONG HAVE WE EXISTED?
>> NOT UNDER THIS -- (SIMULTANEOUS SPEAKING)
>> YOU HAVE SEVEN PEOPLE PULLING THE STRINGS --
>> IT'S NOT LIKE THAT ANYMORE.
BUT THERE'S SEVERAL INSTANCES WHERE WE'RE BRINGING THE OLD INTO THE NEW.
NOW 2.0 IS GOING TO HELP THAT, BUT THERE'S TOO MUCH INSTANCES OF BRINGING THE OLD INTO THE NEW.
TO ME, THIS IS BRINGING THE OLD INTO THE NEW.
WE'RE IN THE SAME POSITION AGAIN AND CANNOT GET EXISTED THOSE FACULTY MEMBERS PERFORMING FOR STUDENTS.
NOW, EVALUATION SYSTEM, BUT IT'S STILL DEPENDING ON ADMINISTRATORS.
WILL THEY REALLY INSTITUTE THE EVALUATION SYSTEM AND MAKE IT REAL TO WHERE -- IF WE DO HAVE -- WE KNOW WE HAVE.
WE KNOW WE HAVE PROBLEM FACULTY.
>> JUSTIN, WHERE ARE YOU ON THIS? YOU'RE THE ONE THAT IS GOING TO BE SITTING IN THIS CHAIR LATER.
>> SO LOOK, IT'S A VALID CONVERSATION OBVIOUSLY.
AND I'M SPENDING A GREAT DEAL OF MY TIME TALKING ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY THROUGHOUT THE COLLEGE.
SO ACCO ADMINISTRATORS TO MAKE SURE WE HOLD FACULTY ACCOUNTABLE.
AND THAT FACULTY ARE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.
SO THE FOCUS WITH THE NEW EVALUATION FOR ALL EMPLOYEES, I THINK, DOES START A NEW DAY AND A NEW OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS.
CERT FLEXIBILITY WHERE WE CAN TO RETAIN GOOD PEOPLE, WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT, BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF GREAT PEOPLE.
WE HAVE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, AND WE'LL DO THAT.
SO T RELATED TO THE TERM, WE WILL WORK THROUGH WHICHEVER VERSION THAT WE GO WITH.
BUT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, FLEXIBILITY IN THAT, I THINK WOULD BE DESIROUS.
>> WHAT IS YOUR PURPOSE? YOU DIDN'T ANSWER.
>> WELL, SO MY PREFERENCE IS IS TO HAVE MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY, WHICH WOULD BE --
>> WHICH WOULD BE TO HAVE A MULTIYEAR TERM THAT IF WE START WITH THE THREE-YEAR, IF WE START WITH THE THREE-YEAR AND GIVES US OPPORTUNITY TO RETAIN GOOD FOLKS, I CAN LOOK AT IT WITH THIS POLICY WITH A ONE-YEAR IF PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, MEET EXPECTATIONS, THEN, MAYBE THEY'RE ON A ONE-YEAR AND THEY'VE GOT SOME THINGS TO FIX.
IF THEY EXCEED EXPECTATIONS, TWO-YEAR OPTION.
IF WE HAVE FOLKS THAT GO ABOVE AND BEYOND -- IN THE FACULTY AND EMPLOYEE EVALUATION, WE CAN DRAW THAT LINE HIGH THAT IF YOU GET ABOVE THAT, WE'VE GOT SOME TOP-NOTCH FOLKS, THEN MAYBE WE CONSIDER THE THIRD YEAR AS AN OPTION TO BE ABLE TO DO THAT.
>> SO THE POLICY MAKES REFERENCE TO THE PROVIDE EEVALUATION SYSTEM.
YOU JUST MADE REFERENCES TO GRADATIONS, MEETS, EXCEEDS, FAR EXCEEDS.
WOUL ATTACHING THE TWO OR THE THREE-YEAR TERM TO LEVELS OF EVALUATION THAT ARE GIVEN TO EACH EMPLOYEE? DOES THAT TAKE AWAY FLEXIBILITY?
>> YEAH, IT MIGHT TAKE AWAY SOME FLEXIBILITY.
SHAUNDA IS NOT HERE RIGHT NOW WHO IS LEADING THAT.
WE CAN BE CLEAR IN THE EVALUATION WHERE THE LINES ARE DRAWN.
>> I THINK YOU'RE DESERVING -- MANAGEMENT IS DESERVING AN O DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO USE THESE NEW TOOLS TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT.
IF NOT, WE'RE GOING TO USE OUR JUDGMENT ON YOU.
>> THAT'S REALLY OUR REALLY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE TO DO WHAT YOU SAY YOU'RE GOING TO DO.
[01:20:03]
AND IF WE'RE STILL SEEING BAD APPLES SLIP THROUGH THE SYSTEM, THEN, SHAME ON YOU.>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: TRUSTEE WILLIAMS.
>> HOW MANY ISSUES HAS THERE BEEN IN THE LAST THREE TO FIVE YEARS WHERE PROFESSORS HAVE BEEN TERMINATED ON CAUSE?
>> I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE AN EXACT NUMBER.
I WOULD SAY HALF A DOZEN AT LEAST INSTANCES.
AND WE'VE NAVIGATED SOME OTHERS.
>> WE'RE TALKING ABOU EGREGIOUS SITUATIONS.
>> IT'S UNFORTUNATE WHEN YOU HAVE FULL-TIME FACULTY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A CASE YOU HAVE AN INCIDENT OR CONDUCT DESERVING OF TERMINATION.
THREE YEARS, I WOULD SAY HALF A DOZEN.
>> COMING TO TRUSTEE FLORES'S POINT, THERE'S INSTANCES WHERE WE DON'T KNOW, BECAUSE ADMINISTRATORS WEREN'T HOLDING FACULTY ACCOUNTABLE AND WE WEREN'T HOLDING ADMINISTRATORS ACCOUNTABLE.
>> YOU KNOW, I THINK IN AN IDEAL WORLD, OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT TO RECRUIT THE BEST PEOPLE WE CAN GET IN THE CLASSROOM.
EACH OF THESE FACULTY MEMBERS ARE GOING TO IMPACT 100 PLUS STUDENTS AT ANY POINT IN TIME.
OVER THE COURSE OF THE YEAR, THAT'S SEVERAL HUNDRED STUDENTS THAT ARE THERE.
EVEN ONE IS PROBLEMATIC IS MY POINT.
IT'S NOT THE ONE FACULTY MEMBER.
IT'S THE HUNDREDS OF STUDENTS THAT ARE DEPRIVED THEIR LEARNING OPPORTUNITY.
ON T EVERYONE IS PERFECT COMING IN.
WE PRIDED OURSELF AS A DISTRICT BEING ABLE TO ATTRACT YOUNG TALENT OUT OF COLLEGE.
MANY OF THEM COMING FROM DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS.
WE WANT TO PROVIDE THAT OPPORTUNITY AND SUPPORT AND ALLOW THEM TO GROW INTO IT.
THEY SHOULD BE GIVEN PROBABLY THE MAXIMUM EARLY ON.
BUT WE SHOULDN'T DISCOURAGE THEM OR WASH THEM OUT EITHER AS WE'RE DOING THAT.
ONCE THAT PERSON HAS ACHIEVED THAT LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE THAT WE REALLY BELIEVE IS THE TYPE OF PERSON WE WANT TO RETAIN, I THINK WE SHOULD DO THE MAXIMUM POSSIBLE TO RETAIN THEM THERE.
SO PERHAPS THE ISSUE IS NOT AS CLEAR-CUT AS A TWO OR ONE, TWO, OR THREE.
BUT REALLY, WHAT IS THE CRITERIA BY WHICH WE MAKE THAT DETERMINATION? BECA THE GOAL OF GETTING ALL STARS.
OUR PROCESS AS LONG AS IT TAKES, WE SHOULD BE IDENTIFYING THOSE.
BUT WHATEVER REASONS, EITHER FIRST PERSON DOESN'T INVEST THEIR OWN TIME AND ENERGY INTO IT TO ACHIEVE THE LEVEL AS NEEDED OR FRANKLY, THEY DEVELOP SOME BAD HABITS OR OTHER THINGS THAT ARE INAPPROPRIATE FOR THE CULTURE, CLIMATE AND CLASSROOM ACTIVITY WE WANT TAKING PLACE, AND NEED TO BE DEALT WITH.
TO YOUR FLORES, WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO DEAL WITH THOSE IN AN EXPEDIENT, FAIRWAY, BUT ONE THAT DOESN'T INFLICT THE HARDSHIP ON STUDENTS.
AND YOU KNOW THOSE SITUATIONS.
>> IF WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH THE MULTIYEAR, WHICH IT SOUNDS LIKE MAJORITY OF MEMBERS ARE AT, SHARE WITH US THE PROCESS YOU'RE GOING TO USE FOR WEEDING OUT THOSE WHO ARE NOT CONFORMING.
WHO ARE NOT SERVING THE STUDENTS IN THE CLASSROOM.
I'M JUST SAYING ONCE YOU HAVE IT -- SHARE IT WITH US.
BECAUSE I DO SEE THEM AS THREE REALLY DISTINCT STEPS IN THE PROCESS.
WE'R THE I BELIEVE HIRING PART OF IT.
THE SECOND PHASE FOR HOW DO WE IDENTIFY, SUPPORT, RETAIN, REWARD OR REMOVE, YOU KNOW, THE TWO RS THERE, HAS NOT BEEN CLARIFIED, AND WE HAVE ABOUT A YEAR TO WORK THAT OUT.
AND A SEPARATE PIECE UNTO ITSELF AS TO HOW WE DEAL WITH THAT.
>> WHEN WILL YOU FINISH THE EVALUATION PROCESS FOR FACULTY? WHEN WILL THAT PROCESS BE COMPLETE THAT THE
[01:25:02]
EVALUATION PROCESS IS DEFINED?>> THE COMMITTEE THAT SHAUNDA IS LEADING ALONG WITH FACULTY LEADERSHIP, ARE WORKING ON THAT NOW.
>> RELATED TO FACULTY, WE'VE ASKED -- I KNOW I'VE ASKED MORE THAN ONE TIME, WHEN ARE WE GOING TO FORMALIZE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EMPLOYEE COUNSELS AND THE INSTITUTION? THAT EVOLVES ORGANICALLY.
BUT THERE'S NO FORMAL RELATIONSHIP IN POLICY.
AND THE FACULTY ASSOCIATION AS IT IS ESTABLISHED AND CONSTITUTED IS TO -- THEIR DUES GO INTO A LEGAL FUND TO SUE THE TAXPAYERS.
AGAIN, WE'RE LETTING THEM USE TAXPAYER -- ET CETERA, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.
>> THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE HEARD AND DISCUSSED WITH THE BOARD AND ARE WORKING, AGAIN, WITH THE PROVOST AND OTHERS TO IDENTIFY THE MOST APPROPRIATE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR THE CONSTITUENT COUNSELS.
THEN SEPARATE RELATIONSHIP WITH THOSE ENTITIES THAT ARE SEPARATE ENTITIES AND SHOULD REMAIN SEPARATE ENTITIES SHOULD NOT BE SUPPORTED WITH TAXPAYER FUNDS.
>> WHAT'S YOUR TIMELINE, ESTIMATED TIMELINE WHEN YOU'LL DO A FIRST READ?
>> I WOULD THINK IN THE SPRING WOULD BE A GOOD --
IT'S SOMETHING THAT IF MEMORY SERVES, AND GOODNESS MY MEMORY MAY BE FAILING ME, SEEMS LIKE WE HAD A ROBUST DISCUSSION IN AUGUST WITH THE BOARD ABOUT THOSE ISSUES WITH THE VIEW TOWARDS BRINGING YOU POLICY THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DEVELOP.
SO I WOULD SAY CERTAINLY IN THE SPRING AND BEFORE MAY WE'LL HAVE SOMETHING TO THE BOARD.
>> THAT COULD BE IN THE MINUTES.
WE'LL MAKE A NOTE OF THAT ALSO.
NOW TO A SINGLE ENTITY, IT'S RIGHT FOR CONSIDERATION HERE, SO WE'LL BRING THAT BACK TO YOU.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: ANY OTHER COMMENTS? QUESTIONS?
>> WE SHORTENED UP OUR THIRD READING DISCUSSION BY AN HOUR.
>> PROBABLY, I WILL NOT BE VOTING IN FAVOR OF THIS.
THE I STILL HAVE TOO MANY CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS.
BUT CERTAINLY RESPECT WHERE YOU ARE ALL ARE AT.
>> QUICK, DID I HEAR YOU SAY THAT OUR ORDINARY PRACTICE FOR SUCCESSION OF ONE-YEAR CONTRACTS? WE DON'T THREE-YEAR CONTRACTS? THAT'S NOT IN THE POLICY PER SE.
>> WE'VE HAD A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT PROGRAMS OVER THE YEARS.
PART OF THAT HAS BEEN BASED UPON THE EXPERIENCE, THE BACKGROUND AND SO FORTH OF INDIVIDUALS.
>> THE EXISTING POLICY, UNTIL AMENDED BY THE BOARD, REQUIRES THREE CONSECUTIVE ONE-YEAR CONTRACTS BEFORE ELIGIBILITY FOR A MULTIYEAR.
WE REMOVE THAT WITH THIS ITERATION OF THE POLICY, BECAUSE WE UNDERSTOOD FROM THE ACADEMIC SIDE -- I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE PROVOST.
THERE WERE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH A MULTIYEAR CONT APPROPRIATE FOR CERTAIN DISCIPLINES, CERTAIN FACULTY HIGH ACHIEVING --
>> WE DID HAVE SITUATIONS UNDER WHICH WE ALLOWED TWO-YEAR CONTRACTS.
USUALLY WHERE WE WERE RECRUITING PARTICULARLY UNDER THE NOW KIND OF DEFUNCT BUT FACULTY PROGRAM.
>> I WANT TO SWAY INTO FLEXIBILITY.
BUT MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY, THERE ARE CERTAIN DISCIPLINES, HARD TO HARD POSITIONS I THINK THAT MIGHT REQUIRE US TO DEVIATE FROM A THREE ONE-YEAR CONTRACT POLICY.
SO WE WANTED TO GIVE MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY WITH THIS.
NOT TO SAY EVERYBODY IS GOING TO GET A MULTIYEAR CONTRACT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES OR FIRST YEAR BECAUSE THAT'S NOT THE CONTEMPLATION I DON'T THINK OF THE ACADEMIC SIDE OF THE HOUSE.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: SHE DEFERS TO YOU FOR NOW.
>> DO THE PROFESSORS -- DO THEY TALK AND SAY I GOT A TWO-YEAR.
THAT DISCUSSING SALARIES, THERE'S UNHAPPINESS.
WHEN THEY DISCUSS CONTRACTS, YOU CAN'T STOP PEOPLE FROM DISCUSSING IT.
THAT'S USUALLY WHEN THERE'S UNHAPPINESS THEY GOT A LONGER CONTRACT OR SOMETHING IN A SPECIFIC AREA THAT IS HARDER TO GET AN INSTRUCTOR, I CAN SEE WHERE THAT WOULD REQUIRE TWO-YEAR.
YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT BE PSYCHOLOGY OR WHAT AREA.
[01:30:03]
I UN FLEXIBILITY, BUT I KIND OF LIKED THAT ONE, ONE, AND ONE.BECAUSE IT KIND OF TELLS YOU THREE YEARS WHAT KIND OF INSTRUCTOR YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE VERSUS OFFERING UP TWO OR THREE, WHICH SEEMS TO BE DIANA'S ISSUE OF ALL THEY'RE GOING TO SEE IS THREE.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SEE THE ONE OR TWO OR THREE.
THEY'RE JUST GOING TO SEE THE NUMBER THREE.
>> I THINK AS TRICIA POINTED OUT, IT'S A VALID POINT.
I AGREE 100%, PEOPLE WILL TALK.
PEOPLE COMPARE NOTES ALL THE TIME.
THE WELL CONTEMPLATE A SCENARIO WHEREBY ABSENT EXTRAORDINARY CIRCUMSTANCES LIKE HARD TO HIRE FACULTY POSITION, FOR EXAMPLE, IT REQUIRES THREE CONSECUTIVE ONE-YEAR CONTRACTS.
WE WANTED TO GIVE THE PROVOST AND HER TEAM TO DEVELOP THE PROCEDURE THAT BEST REFLECTS GOOD ACADEMIC PRACTICE WHEN IT COMES TO HIRING.
>> I WAS GOING TO SAY THAT AGAIN, I JUST THINK RUNNING AN INSTITUTION IS LIKE RUNNING A BUSINESS.
THERE'S SITUATIONS WHERE YOU HAVE TO HAVE FLEXIBILITY, AND IF YOU DON'T, YOU HOLD MANAGEMENT RESPONSIBLE IF THEY DISUSE OR MISUSE THE FLEXIBILITY.
WHEN HIGH-TECHS, SOME INDUSTRIES WE'RE MOVING INTO WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AND THERE MAY BE TEN PROFESSORS IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY AND WE WANT TO HAVE THAT IN OUR WORK FORCE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM, THAT'S OUR LATITUDE TO BE ABLE TO RECRUIT THOSE PEOPLE.
OF THE WE DON'T WANT TO FOREGO BECAUSE OF SOME POLICY THAT WE'VE TIED MANAGEMENT'S HANDS TO DO THAT.
I'M MANAGEMENT AND LOOKING HOW MANAGEMENT PERFORMED IN ALL AREAS, THIS ONE OF THEM.
NOT NOT DOING SOMETHING THAT WOULD GIVE THEM NOT AN OPPORTUNITY TO PERFORM AT THEIR BEST WITH WHAT I WOULD THINK MANAGEMENT HAS TO HAVE AT THAT LEVEL.
IT'S JUST MY PHILOSOPHY HOW I HAVE ONE PERSON TO HOLD REALLY ACCOUNTABLE, AND THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING TO REALLY LOOK.
IF HE ALLOWS IT TO PERFORM BELOW HIM, THAT'S HIS PROBLEM.
>> THERE'S NO ABSENCE OF FLEXIBILITY IN A TWO-YEAR.
AGAIN, GOOD FACULTY ARE GOING TO BE GOOD NO MATTER WHAT, ONE-YEAR, NO CONTRACT, WHATEVER.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE GOOD NO MATTER WHAT.
ALL FACULTY WILL BE UNDER THIS NEW POLICY, CORRECT?
>> THERE WILL BE NO GRANDFATHERING?
>> WELL, WE WILL BE REQUIRED, BECAUSE --
>> ONCE THIS POLICY -- DO THE MATH FOR ME.
2023, EVERYBODY WILL BE UNDER THE SAME POLICY.
>> THE ROLLING THREE-YEAR NOW.
>> WE'RE GOING TO WOR THROUGH THOSE AND THEN EVERYBODY UNDER THE SAME POLICY.
>> ONCE THE THIRD YEA EXPIRES, EVERYBODY IS ON THE SAME.
>> THEN, CAN THE STUDENT EVALUATIONS BE MADE PUBLIC? PUBLIC RECORD, CORRECT?
>> TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY BE -- WITH RESPECT TO THE IDENTITY OF THE STUDENTS, THERE'S THINGS WE HAVE TO KEEP PROTECTED, THESE EVALUATIONS COULD BE PUBLIC, YES.
>> SO IF YOU COULD PLEASE LOOK AT THAT, I THINK THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT.
THAT WOULD BE ONE MEASURE WE CAN LOOK AT AS TRUSTEES TO KNOW IF ADMINISTRATION IS DOING ITS WORK IN TERMS OF EVALUATING AND HOLDING ACCOUNTABLE FACULTY.
PREV QUESTION AND IT'S BEEN ANSWERED.
AT THE END OF EVERY CLASS, STUDENTS DO AN EVALUATION OF THEIR INSTRUCTOR, CORRECT? BUT THAT EVALUATION -- THOSE EVALUATIONS HAVE NEVER BEEN TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN EVALUATING THE FACULTY MEMBER, CORRECT?
>> I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN ANSWER THAT.
I APOLOGIZE, BECAUSE I'M NOT FAMILIAR.
I DO KNOW THAT THE INSTRUMENT BEING EXPLORED BY THE PROVOST AND HER COMMITTEE IS GOING TO BE MORE ROBUST IN THE PAST.
>> PREVIOUSLY, THE ANSWER HAS BEEN TYPICALLY NOT.
>> LET'S GET A SPECIFIC ANSWER ON THAT.
>> SO WE NEED TO FIND A WAY THAT WE CAN KNOW AND THE PUBLIC CAN KNOW, TOO, WHAT THE STUDENT EVALUATIONS ARE ON OUR INSTRUCTORS.
>> CHAIRWOMAN LIRA BRAVO: OKAY.
THIS WILL BE AT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING.
SO IF YOU THINK OF ANYTHING ELSE, WE CAN DISCUSS IT THEN.
(ADJOURNED)
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.