I realize that the normal order of business is minutes, old business, new business, and announcements. The committee still has its self-assessment to accomplish, and there is the question of a recommendation to dissolve the committee and upmerge the participatory governance chairs. Unless others feel strongly otherwise, I feel those are the two items on our agenda for Friday.

As far as I am aware, only one member has responded to the two "internal" evaluation questions:
1. List and describe two things about the functioning of the CoC that "worked."
2. List and describe two things about the functioning of the CoC that need to be improved. Provide suggestions for improvement.

I suspect the lack of response is a form of evaluation as well. The external evaluation "three questions" results now have 45 respondents, no change in the statistics there.

For me the strongest piece of evidence that CoC is without a clear mission and function is that the core role was originally for committees to update each other and pass action items off to other committees. These functions are occurring via external communications between chairs often by email. The minutes are being posted, but not read, I suspect committees ought to make a monthly post to the college front page feed on their activities - once you remove administrators, almost no one is reading the minutes being posted in the wiki system.

There are two other matters rolling around the faculty side of the national campus that probably rightly belong to the FSS but will likely fall in between the gaps in the solar panels over the summer session.

The first is an issue of making up missed classes. This tangles up with Carnegie units and an argument that student learning outcomes are the paramount consideration was dismissed by the VPIA who noted financial aid and tuition are based on the Carnegie unit. Although faculty seem to think sick leave is also entangled in this issue, the VPIA does not. Thus the VPIA does not see this as an HR/personnel policy issue. Which would throw the matter back to CAC. What is the basis of a college education? Learning outcomes? Hours? Grades? Some combination thereof? Without those definitions and understandings, coming to grips with the missed class issue is difficult at best.

The second issue is one swirling around the matter of what is/was 10/2 and what are the contractual obligations to be on campus during non-class hours or non-class days. This arose out of a note that faculty were to have been at work on the Wednesday and Thursday morning of spring break. As one faculty member said, administrators who were once faculty are jealous that faculty get to stay home without penalty. I am concerned that there are definitional issues here. I do not think we are on 10/2 anymore. That was ten months work, two months off and led to the bizarre situation that faculty had to be on campus into June after graduation, but did not have to show up until 1:30 P.M. on the business day before classes started (attendance at the all faculty meeting counted as de facto contract start). The administration gave ground and allowed faculty to be off contract after graduation each term, the faculty agreed to attend graduation, and show up two weeks before the fall term, one week before the spring term. There is an issue where state campuses who do not have graduation get off after their final grades are submitted.

This is the last meeting prior to elections in May for all committees. Personally I would like to see CoC adopt a dissolution recommendation coupled to a recommendation to move the chairs onto EC. Then May elections can proceed with chairs aware that they will likely be on EC. That is just my personal take.