Accordingly, a polling station and ballot box will be located in the lobby of Building 13 and in operation from 8:30AM to 4:30PM on Wednesday, October 3rd and Thursday, October 4th. Provisions are being made for absentee ballots. Again, the referendum is open to all non-administrative employees, whether full-time or part-time.
Thanks for keeping me in the loop. I don’t view your comments as a dispaly of distempter; they reflect the frustrations of many on campus.
A statement hobbled by equivocations might soothe those with more sensitive souls but, given the seriousness of the matters at hand, a timorous message would be a disservice to the campus community. The administration should be told bluntly why Shared Governance failed to retain the confidence of many whose interests it was supposed to represent.
There are times when frankness is far more valuable than diplomacy when striving to secure the common good. I commend you for having the strength of character to address these painful issues in a forthright manner. I’m quite certain I am not alone in my admiration for you and your efforts to develop a body which encourages the administration to become more open, responsive and accountable to all who work at STCC.
You can be certain that salient points rasied in your draft will be considered by the members of the Professional Association during our September 26 meeting.
Shared Governance is dissolved and will not be revived at this time.
The committee to restructure SG has arrived at the decision that this form of governance is not tenable on this campus in the current climate. In order for SG to thrive, it is essential that the Administration, especially the Office of the President, support and uphold the decisions made by the committees.
Following the NEASC accreditation process, we received instructions from the commission to look at how SG is not working on this campus and to fix it. To begin this process, the Coordinator of SG (Pamelyn “PJ” Jongbloed) met with President Rubenzahl to discuss how to approach this process and how to address the needs from the NEASC response.
A committee to restructure SG was convened through the coordinating committee. At our first meeting, we discussed what we saw as the problems of SG and how we should proceed. The resounding sentiment from this group, which surprised none of us, was that there was no support of SG from the Administration on campus. The committee decided that we needed to get a clear statement from President Rubenzahl on how the Administration would support any form of SG. The three most recent Coordinators of SG (PJ , Joe Maciaszek, and Brandon Poe) met with President Rubenzahl to discuss what SG means on this campus and to express that he and his Administration had to do to share in this governance for it to be affective.
So, President Rubenzahl attended meetings of the restructuring committee and we started a discussion about what needed to be done. The committee felt that a contract needed to be established outlining the role the Administration would play in this new iteration of Shared Governance. President Rubenzahl agreed to compose a draft of this agreement that we would discuss at the next meeting. That draft was bland and non-committal and was not accepted by the committee. Brandon Poe, with the agreement of the committee, drafted a new statement.
At the next meeting of this committee, with the President’s input, we worked through the points in that new draft and decided on language that was agreeable to all. The result of that exercise is the Agreement which was presented to the campus through the Forum at the end of the Spring. At that same Forum, we all voted to dissolve Shared Governance while voting to have the committee to restructure meet again to present options, or models, of how Governance can continue on our campus.
The result of that meeting is just this: There appears to be no model of Shared Governance that can hope to work on this campus. The morale on campus is abysmal and the mood seems cynical that the Administration would honor, much less participate in, any governance structure which does not allow for carte blanche. It is the strong recommendation from this committee that SG not be restructured and our response to the NEASC letter state as much.
Chair of the Committee to Restructure Shared Governance
President of STCCPA
The membership unanimously approved the suggestion that PA President Camerota co-sign Dr. Poe’s letter
Unanimously endorse at the STCCPA chapter meeting.
170 Beach Road #52
- Whether additional course section(s) shall be taught by the faculty member; and/or
- Whether the faculty member shall provide activities related to course, program or curriculum development; and/or
- Whether the faculty member shall provide activities such as independent study, contract learning, learning resources development, assessment of prior learning or similar instructional activities; and/or
- Whether the faculty member shall provide activities such as additional office hours, advise more students, engage in additional college/community service, or professional development activities; and/or
- Whether the faculty member shall provide activities of an administrative nature for which the faculty member is deemed qualified; and/or
- Whether the faculty member will provide additional tutorial laboratory instruction, where a faculty member is teaching two or more sections of courses designed to develop basic skills, whether remedial or supplemental, credit or non-credit or their equivalent in time and/or content as determined by the President or the President’s designee.
170 Beach Road #52