Minutes February 22, 2016

Attendees: Brent Hirata, Rachael Inake, Daniela Elliott, Pete Gross, Jeffrey Breitenfeldt, Michelle Igarashi, Warren Kawano, Abdul-Karim Khan, Dalybeth Reasoner and Greg Walker

  1. Minutes from February 22, 2016’s meeting was unanimously approved
  2. DE Course/Instructor Approval (continuation from last meeting): Greg Walker
    1. Academic Senate for California Community Colleges “The senate and union should engage in dialog in order to ensure that a high quality distance education program is provided for the students while respecting the workplace rights of online faculty….Through the collegial consultation process, local senates play a central role in ensuring that professional standards are established for faculty training.  Faculty must recognize that teaching online requires skills and training not only in the use of technology but also in effective pedagogical methods for teaching in the online environment.”
      1. 41.5% of the senates review and approve training policies and guidelines and 36.6% replied played no role.
      2. ACCJC accreditation standard IIIA.1 The “institution assures the integrity and quality of its programs and services by employing administrators, faculty, and staff who are qualified by appropriate education, training, and experience to provide and support these programs and services,”
      3. standard IIIA.14 requires that colleges “provide all personnel with appropriate opportunities for continued professional development, consistent with the institutional mission and based on evolving pedagogy, technology, and learning needs.”
      4. In its Guide to Evaluating Distance Education and Correspondence Education(2013, pages 25 and 27)[3], the ACCJC is quite clear that it expects institutions to consider the qualifications of faculty selected to teach online and that colleges with online programs must include in their professional development offerings professional development for online faculty.
      5. Local senates should consult with their union colleagues before developing policies that establish preparation requirements for faculty to teach online.
    2. JOCODOL – position statement. The University of Hawaii System has the potential to be a leader in the area of online learning. Top published experts in the field are among UH Manoa faculty. Some of the best known online programs exist in our system. In order to be successful, online learning requires a significant commitment by stakeholders in the UH system. It is our position that online learning at UH can be successful if::
      1. UH develops a vision for online education
      2. UH operationalizes that vision with a clear mission
      3. UH collaborates with existing individuals and units that already exist in the system
      4. UH commits resources to online learning
      5. Position Statement
    3. What are our recommendations to faculty senate?
      1. Greg suggested taking the time to craft a well thought out plan
      2. More training for faculty who teach online
      3. DE coordinators/liaisons inside each division would be the resource person that can help people connect with DE resources. These people would need training. How would they get paid for training? It was suggested that was part of the committee work. The coordinators would reach out to new instructors and existing faculty.
      4. Greg thinks it needs to come from the division chairs, not from the coordinators
      5. Ask division chairs to have as a common practice.
      6. Greg suggested that division chairs be part of the process, so it also becomes their responsibility. There would be a liaison person, with the backing of the division chair.
      7. Let’s make a recommendation to the senate and let the senate pick that up and run with it. This way the faculty senate can then decide what to do. When? A week before May 4th, 2016 so Pete can present it to faculty senate. April 18th is the DE meeting before that. We should have a draft written by March 28, 2016.
      8. Open a Google Doc and have reason why(data) and our recommendation.
  3.  Subcommittee Break Out (Tabled)
    1. IOTA
    2. DE Faculty Idea Exchange
    3. DE Survey and Evaluation
      1. Fall 2015 student evaluation
  4. Announcements
    1. None
  5. New Business
    1. None
  6. Adjournment at 4:05pm
Tagged with:
Posted in Minutes

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Skip to toolbar