PEERPOINT!

AAUP Update
By Carmela Arnoldt
GWCC's Dr. Marie Fenske has submitted her name as a candidate for Arizona AAUP
State President and GCC's Rod Brooker has submitted his for Arizona AAUP State
Treasurer.  The Faculty Association should support Maricopa faculty members who win state AAUP offices.  As well, several former Council Presidents reminded FEC of historical events at MCCD when AAUP provided valuable services; continued affiliation seems prudent.
 
Update on Professional Growth
By Linda Larson, Meet & Confer Co-Chair, MCC
During the past two years the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) sub-committee of Meet and Confer has been working to revise and review the current Professional Growth program available to Maricopa faculty.  The use of an MOU committee allows complex issues to be worked on in a problem-solving format to resolve the details before bringing the final proposal to the Meet and Confer process.

In May of 2000 all fulltime faculty were sent a survey: Explore the knowledge, usage and attitudes toward the current Professional Growth program for Maricopa Community Colleges. The survey instrument and results are available through the Faculty Association website www.dist.maricopa.edu/org/faculty/.  The tally of completed surveys on June 1, 00 was 407, a 39% response rate.

The survey found faculty recognize professional growth as an outstanding opportunity and benefit; in fact, 88% indicated it is “highly motivational” in their professional life.  65% indicated they had applied for academic advancement, (traditional classes) and 56% for non-academic advancement, training through conferences, workshops, and work experience, etc.

Survey results also found faculty are dismayed that the most challenging aspect of the Professional Growth programs seems to be the request for committee approval and recording of participation rather than the faculty member’s project.  In the admirable effort to make the process fair and accountable, the approval process has become cumbersome.  Many comments suggested a single person check off the obvious projects; others plead for simplicity, less jargon, and clearer guidelines.

As a result of the survey, a series of meetings with Faculty Professional Growth, Faculty Executive Council and the Deans of Instruction allowed the MOU committee to work to respond to these issues.  The MOU committee established several goals:

1. Increase opportunities for participation in the Professional Growth Program for all faculty
2. Improve communication to all faculty about the program
3. Streamline the application approval process

A review of past Residential Faculty Policies indicates that the current program ideology has been in place since 1969.  We have been operating with what could be described as a “University” model where the emphasis on continued professional growth and learning is in advanced university coursework.

In the last 30 years the opportunities for learning have expanded in a variety of ways.  Courses, tutorials, workshops, clinics, etc. both in and outside a university setting offer current, contemporary, and complementary avenues for learning.  Over this time, the Doctoral degree remains a distinctive achievement in education and mastery of one’s field of expertise.  However, the speed with which new information develops requires everyone, including the subject specialist, to continue to learn in a variety of areas.

While we have been quick to redesign our programs of study to meet the changing climate of learning for our students, we have moved slowly to do that for our faculty.  In our current “University” model we require 55 of the 75 hours that can be earned for horizontal advancement to be academic courses.  For many faculty an additional 55 hours of academic course work is not the primary method of improving classroom expertise.  As well, this model does not recognize additional learning after the attainment of the doctoral degree.

As a result, we are proposing changes to appendix A in the RFP. We are negotiating for removal of the current limits of 20 non-academic hours and 55 academic hours. We also propose that faculty with doctoral degrees be given the opportunity to earn horizontal advancement.

These changes increase professional growth opportunities for our entire faculty.   Consider that occupational areas such as medical, electronics, and computer instruction are changing rapidly as a result of technology; these changes are not always best served by advanced level course work.  The hiring of young, new Ph.D.'s may result that a person hired at age 30 works 12 years and reaches the maximum level of compensation.  As teaching is the ultimate goal for many faculty, this cap could leave an 18-year period with little hope for increased compensation or recognition of continued professional growth.

In the past 30 years learning has been redesigned, reformatted and repackaged into a wide variety of opportunities and we recognize the need to offer these options for our faculty.  We see faculty as the best judge of what study will help them be most effective in their teaching.  Removing these limits allows them to customize a professional growth path.   We are also working to streamline the complexity of the peer review approval process.

Other proposed changes include the need for the District FPG staff support to become a permanent fulltime position.  This position is currently a 20 hr per week temporary position.  Proposals to allocate reassigned time for campus FPG Committee representatives and to request a rollover of a portion of unused funds at the end of the fiscal year are also being made.

Considerable work still needs to be done.  We are revising the guidelines for faculty application process, developing training materials for campus FPG representatives, and planning to review the sabbatical and summer projects requirements.  We hope to have a streamlined approval process, an on-line information system, and a new application in place for Fall semester '01

These proposed changes are significant and exciting.  Your Meet and Confer team is working hard to see these become a reality.  The MOU sub-committee welcomes your input on these proposals.
 
Linda Larson, Co-Chair of Meet and Confer, MCC, has chaired the committee.  Members include Rosemary Kesler, current President of Faculty Executive Council, Bob Galloway, Meet & Confer, Past President of FEC, MCC, Monica Wadsworth, GWCC, Sandra Wells, PC, Stephanie Fujii, EMCC, all current FPG Committee members, John Nelson, former FPG Committee member & current Senate President, PVCC, Jeanne Christian, District FPG staff support, and Instructional Deans Jolyne Ghanatabadi, GWCC, and Marian Tadano, PC.  Considerable support came from Marybeth Mason, acting Director of the MCLI (and faculty of CGCC), in providing the core work team of this group with time to focus on this project.

DUAL ENROLLMENT:
A RECRUITER FOR DIVERSITY
By Dr. Willie Minor, Rio Salado College
The Maricopa District has made a concerted effort toward making sure that diversity is included at all levels of the organization.   Promoting diversity is the right thing to do, but the essence of what can help provide diversity is being attacked by an elitist few, including a few misguided Arizona Tax Research Association (ATRA) representatives.  These few have openly attacked dual enrollment.

Ethnicity is one component of diversity; there are numerous other categories to consider under the auspices of diversity.  Since I am an ethnic-minority member of our society, this article focuses mostly on ethnicity, but is certainly not limited to it.

Dual enrollment allows all students an opportunity to experience college success at the high school level.  Many minority students would never consider entering the doors of higher education if it were not for experiencing success in a college course at the high school setting.  Many ethnic-minority students have low self-esteem and they doubt their ability to compete in higher education.  This barrier is removed by their experiences associated with passing a college course.

Although R7-1-709 is undergoing revision, presently it reads as follows:

R7-1-709. Community College Classes Offered in Conjunction with High Schools
(Approved by the State Board of Directors for Community Colleges of Arizona on January 19, 2001)

With the approval of the community college District Governing Board, college courses that can be counted toward both high school and college graduation requirements may be offered by community colleges at the high school during the school day under the following circumstances:

1.  The community college District Governing Board and the governing board of the school district or organization of which the high school is a part shall enter into an intergovernmental agreement or contract which shall, at a minimum, include the following provisions:

a.  All public high school students enrolled for college credit must be currently enrolled for a     full-time instructional program as defined in A.R.S. 15-901 in addition to the college course or courses except that high school seniors who satisfy high school graduation requirements with less than a full-time instructional program shall be exempt from this provision.

b.  The responsibility of the community college and of the high school for payment for facilities, personnel, and other costs and the manner in which the college tuition is to be paid by for on behalf of each student, shall be clearly stated.

2.  Students shall have been admitted to the community college under the provisions of R7-1-301.C. - Student Admissions.

a.  All students enrolled for college credit shall be high school juniors or seniors.  All students in the course, including those not electing to enroll for college credit, shall satisfy the prerequisites for the course as published in the college catalog and comply with college policies regarding student placement in courses.

b.  A community college may waive the requirements specified in Section 2.a., above, for up to 25 percent of the students enrolled by a college in courses provided under this rule if the community college has established written standards for waiving the requirements for each course.  All such exceptions shall be reported as provided in Section 6.b., below.

3.  The courses shall have been evaluated and approved through the official college curriculum approval process pursuant to R7-1-701.D., be at a higher level than taught by the high school, be transferable to an Arizona public university or applicable to an established community college occupational degree or certificate program, and meet all other standards for courses established in R7-1-701. Physical education courses are excluded from this program.

4.  College approved textbooks, syllabuses, course outlines, and grading standards, applicable to the courses when taught at the community college campus or other instructional venues shall apply to the courses, and all students in the courses, when offered under the provisions of this rule.  The Chief Executive Officer of each community college is responsible for involving full-time faculty teaching in the discipline in overseeing course selection and implementation in the high schools to ensure that course goals and standards are understood, that course guidelines are followed, and that the same standards of expectation and assessment are applied in all venues where the college offers courses.

5.  Each faculty member shall have a valid community college teaching certificate in the field being taught and shall have been selected and evaluated by the college using the same procedure and criteria that are used at the community college campus.  The Chief Executive Officer of each community college is responsible for involving full-time faculty teaching in the discipline in the selection, orientation, ongoing professional development, and evaluation of faculty teaching college courses in conjunction with high schools.

6.  Each community college district shall annually, by September 1, provide a report to the State Board of community college courses being offered in conjunction with high schools during the previous fiscal year.  In the case of a multi-college district, the multi-college district shall provide a separate report for each college.

This report shall include the following:

a.  Documentation of compliance with the requirements identified in Sections 3, 4 and 5, above.
b.  The numbers of students in each course who did not meet the criteria defined in Section 2.a.,
     above.
c.  Total enrollments broken down by location, by high school grade level, by course, and by type of
     program (academic or occupational).
d.  Summary data on performance of students enrolled for college credit in courses offered
     in conjunction with high schools, including completion rates and grade distribution.

7.  Each community college district shall conduct tracking studies of subsequent academic or occupational achievement of students enrolled in courses offered under the provisions of this rule.  The report of the results of the first tracking study shall be submitted to the State Board by September 1, 2003 and subsequent reports shall be submitted to the State Board by September 1 of each odd-numbered year thereafter.

a.  These tracking studies may involve statistically valid sampling techniques and shall include, at a minimum, the following elements:  high school graduation rate, the number of students continuing their studies after graduation at an Arizona community college or public university, the performance of the students in subsequent college courses in the same discipline or occupational field, and the student’s grade point average after year one at an Arizona community college or university as compared to the student’s college grade point average for courses completed while still in high school.

b.  Upon receipt of the report of these studies, the State Board shall convene an ad hoc committee that shall include community college academic officers, faculty, and others expert in the field to review the manner in which these courses are provided.  This committee may make recommendations to the State Board, with a copy to each district governing board, regarding desirable changes in this rule or in the manner in which the rule is being implemented.

State Board rule R7-1-709 does not discriminate among students, it provides the same opportunity for all.  There are high school students who are better prepared than our average adult walk-in students.  The question is, “What is the basis of discrimination on this issue?”  After all, students are students.

By attacking State Board rule R7-1-709, community colleges have closed the doors to welcoming diversity in the system.

People in the external community are now becoming concerned and asking, “Where are the spokespeople for minority students who benefit from dual enrollment but are not in a position to speak for themselves?” If decisions are being made about students, why aren’t students included in the discussions, particularly those students who have experienced success by participating in dual enrollment?

There are a large number of students who complete dual enrollment courses, complete high school, and go on to complete a degree.

For the purpose of DUAL ENROLLMENT A RECRUITER FOR DIVERSITY, the number of minority students who were enrolled in courses in Fiscal Year 2000 at Rio Salado College (One of Maricopa’s Community Colleges) are:

Hispanic                                      698
American Indian/Alaskan Native    65
Asian/Pacific Islander                   589
Black Non-Hispanic                    105
TOTAL                                   1,457

These numbers are significant.  If all of the Maricopa Colleges submitted their data, the number would be overwhelming.  There is also data available showing how inexpensive dual enrollment is to the taxpayers.  There is a great return on taxpayer’s investment.

Alternatives to investing in dual enrollment are to invest in prisons, law enforcement, drug and alcohol rehabilitation, etc.

There are those in the community who suggest that exclusion of minority students from participating in dual enrollment hedges on racism.  Oftentimes minorities perceive loss of opportunity and exclusion as being indicators of racism.

The data for this article were collected to remove the guesswork as to how many minority students are being impacted by the discussions and decisions that will be made on dual enrollment.

By attacking dual enrollment, diversity becomes an endangered species.

Dual enrollment recruits the brightest diversity students in our high schools.  Dual enrollment students tend to be successful from high school through college.  Dual enrollment, as with promoting diversity, is the right thing to do.

College Presidential Search Updates

GWCC
By Mark Richard, GWCC Faculty Senate President
The first meeting of the search committee took place on March 5th.  Dr. Gaskin gave the committee its charge, and the committee will establish selection criteria.

PC
By Denny Sheehan, PC Faculty Senate President
Phoenix College has formed a pre-search committee that will identify and forward names from each of the college stake holders and employee groups to the Chancellor for final determination of the search committee. The pre-search committee will also seek to gather campus input as to the desired qualities for Presidential Candidates. This information, as well as a proposed time line, will be given to the search committee when it is seated.  The pre-search committee held its first meeting on Tuesday 2/20.

PVCC
By John Nelson, PVCC Faculty Senate President
Paradise Valley Community College received fifty-seven applications and intends to complete the paper screening by Thursday, February 22, 2001.  We intend to complete the first interviews from March 19th to March 23rd, and we will conduct a series of forums with the finalists in mid April.  We hope to forward the names of three finalists to the Chancellor (for his decision) on April 20, 2001.  The target date for the new president to come on board is July 1, 2001.

SMCC
By Ann Lindner, SMCC Faculty Senate President
The search for a new president for SMCC is presently on schedule.  We have received over 60 applicants for the position.  The committee is pleased with the depth and richness of the pool and will have finished reading the applications by March 2.   If the projected time schedule is met, we will be submitting the names of our finalist to Dr. Gaskin by the end of April or the 1st week in May.  It is our hope that a new president will be Board approved and on campus by July 1.

Governing Board Member Recognized
By Carmela Arnoldt, GCC Faculty Senate Vice President
Senior Governing Board Member Mrs. Linda B. Rosenthal received the Fran Waldman Humanitarian Award from Jewish Women International on Monday, February 19.  At a luncheon in her honor, five local high school students received recognition and scholarships for outstanding contributions in volunteerism to their schools and communities.  Congratulations, Linda and students!
 

MCCCD FACULTY ASSOCIATION 2000-01 OFFICERS
ROSEMARY KESLER, PRESIDENT
JANICE REILLY, PRESIDENT-ELECT
SANDRA STUEBNER, SECRETARY
MARK RICHARD, TREASURER
CARMELA ARNOLDT, PEERPOINT EDITOR
FACULTY ASSOCIATION OFFICE PHONE... (480) 731-8113