Monthly Archives: March 2016

Keep in mind that this is not an official document of the Senate, has not been vetted by any other Senator, and represents my own opinions as to what to report. For official records, please consult the minutes.

There was substantial discussion on the topic of improving faculty diversity. Some senators expressed dissatisfaction at the apparent view of the board and administration that lack of diversity is due to bias (conscious or unconscious) bias on the part of hiring committee members. It was suggested that evidence for such bias would come from a statistical analysis of diversity in a hiring pool compared to diversity in actual hiring, and that improved data on hiring pool diversity was needed. There was discussion on how to improve hiring pool diversity, including issues of when hirings occur (some other institutions hire earlier and actively recruit and interview at winter conferences), where positions are advertised, and faculty pay. It was further suggested that Human Resources could investigate whether the position advertisements could be crafted to underscore the campus’s commitment to diversity in hiring.

The governing board has announced the final composition of the hiring committee for the president. The committee will consist of 8 faculty members, 5 classified staff members, 3 administrators, 1 board member (who will also chair the committee), 1 student, and 1 community member. Requests for volunteers have already been sent out to faculty, and faculty are urged to consider volunteering for this extremely important assignment. It was agreed that 2 faculty would be selected by PFF and 6 by the Senate, with emphasis on divisional representation if possible. There is substantial concern with the chair of the committee being a member of the governing board. The committee chair will have a substantial role in guiding the process, and if this member is then part of the closed-door governing board session which makes the final decision, the possibility of undue influence on the final selection is very high. It was pointed out that the board meeting does not *have* to be closed door, and it would be possible for the board to invite either faculty observers or a compliance officer (or both) to witness the deliberations and avoid any appearance of a rigged process. There was some skepticism on whether the board would agree to such a proposal.

The Academic Technology committee would like to remind everyone to please make sure to get videos you intend to use in class to ATRC staff ASAP, as they need to be converted and recaptioned.

The Articulation Officer mentioned that the statewide senate is developing an Area of Emphasis degree in Law and Public Policy, designed to increase underrepresented minority student access to law school. At this stage, faulty input is sought in a discipline input group meeting in Ontario on April 2 from 10-3. Faculty from communication studies, philosophy, political science, and administration of justice are especially sought, buy all faculty are welcome to participate.

The position of faculty tri-chair for accreditation will be open starting in Fall. The Senate agreed that the position will have a three-year term. The person currently serving as tri-chair (me, as it turns out) cannot continue in the position. If anyone is interested in knowing what the position entails, please contact me, and I can describe it fully.

As always, please feel free to let me know anything you’d like brought to the Senate’s attention.

-Richard Albistegui-DuBois

A few items of particular interest were discussed at the Senate on Monday. Here is my summary:

The PFF sent out a survey via email recently to obtain faculty opinions on a number of issues. They had received 342 responses as of the meeting. Among these, they found broad agreement that improving the diversity of faculty, staff, and administrators was an important goal, but that hiring based solely on perceived thnicity of applicant names was not a good way of accomplishing it. Most respondents felt that they would have hired either of the candidates for President which were rejected by the Board, and there was substantial uncertainty as to whether the Board’s decision to hire neither candidate was in the best interests of the college.

The Learning Outcomes Council reported that they have begun sending out invitations to participate in the assessment of the Digital Literacy ILO, which will be assessed using a third-party tool. In addition, they are considering how best to assess next year’s ILO. Having that assessment integrated with the PRP process is under consideration.

There was substantial discussion on the ongoing question of improving diversity among faculty, staff, and administration. Trustee Halcon did not respond favorably to the Senate’s resolution expressing disapproval of his actions regarding hiring, feeling that it constituted a personal attack. I have provided more extensive information on this topic at the end of this report, including information from a document from the statewide Academic Senate, in which suggestions on how to encourage the growth of diversity in hiring without violating the law were presented. The full publication can be found here (and I do recommend it as interesting reading): http://www.asccc.org/content/commitment-success-all-hiring-faculty-serve-needs-our-diverse-students

The governing board is meeting today (March 15) to determine the composition of the new search committee for the President position. The Senate is concerned that faculty representation on the committee may be substantially reduced, and that this will result in a president whom the faculty do not feel they were properly involved in vetting. The Senate will probably be sending out a call for faculty interested in serving on the search committee sometime after the meeting on Wednesday evening, and further selections will be made based on what composition the Board selects.

Finally, there was discussion on the ACCJC’s second recommendation, which involved creating a campus environment which encouraged participation in shared governance from all campus constituencies, including classified staff and part-time faculty. The fact that part-time faculty receive no compensation for service in shared governance was identified as a likely major factor presenting a barrier to their participation. Remedying this would be a topic for negotiation, and the PFF affirmed that it is always a requested item. It was also mentioned that departments can try to offer adjunct faculty as much schedule consistency as possible, to make it easier to know whether they can count on being able to serve on a specific committee.

I’ve included information on the diversity discussion, including a summary (paraphrased) of what I see as key and interesting suggestions from the article, below. As always, please feel free to contact me with any issues you’d like to bring to the Senate’s attention.

-Richard Albistegui-DuBois

A few interesting points from the article (my own paraphrasing and interpretation, please read the actual article):

• The focus of hiring should not be on the specific appearance or background of the candidate, but rather on how well the candidate can serve a diverse student population, and what kind of cultural competence the candidate possesses. Seeking candidates with whom students from a variety of backgrounds can relate is likely to produce a diverse faculty, more representative of the student body.

• Job announcements should emphasize the campus’s commitment to serving all students, and the expectation that candidates will have similar priorities. Announcements should be intentionally crafted to appeal to candidates with all backgrounds.

• Hiring committees should consider whether their evaluation criteria place proper emphasis on qualities which will serve students well. While the priority is always to hire the best person for the job, they should consider how important holding Ph.Ds or having a decade of teaching experience is to being an excellent instructor, and whether experience relating to students from a variety of backgrounds should be considered a highly desirable quality.

• Instead of a single, perfunctory “diversity question” in an interview, committees should consider working the candidate’s competence to deal with diverse students into a variety of questions. The committees might also consider longer, more in-depth interviews to get a better sense of the candidates beyond their surface answers and record.

Please remember that this is not an official Senate document, and represents only my own opinions. It is not approved or endorsed by any other member of the Faculty Senate. For official minutes, please go to https://www.palomar.edu/facultysenate/calendar/.

I was only able to attend the first hour of this Senate meeting, so I can’t offer any personal commentary on what happened after I left. However, during the first hour, there were several topics of note.

You should expect to receive (or may have already received) a notification regarding a survey for faculty. Your input will be invited on certain topics of interest to the campus community, including diversity, leadership, and the governing board.

Lillian Payn mentioned that a webinar on ensuring that online course materials are accessible according to ADA guidelines will be held on March 10, from 12-1. Contact her for more information.

The Senate discussed a resolution expressing strong dissatisfaction with Trustee Halcon’s actions at the February 9 meeting of the governing board, and pointing out that those actions violated board policy, education code, and Title V. The Senate strongly reaffirmed the existing policy that faculty hiring procedures are the domain of the Senate, rather than the governing board.

The question of how to improve diversity in the faculty and staff of the college, as well as how to have a robust discussion of the nature and value of diversity, was under discussion when I left.

I hope to be able to provide further description as I get filled in on other matters. In the meantime, please feel free to bring any concerns to my attention. Also, remember that Senate meetings are always open to the public!

-Richard Albistegui-DuBois