View Document - ARC Institutional Governance Online Repository (IGOR)

Meeting Notes

NAME OF COUNCIL/TEAM: Student Success Council
OBJECTIVE OF MEETING: Discuss: -FYE Resource Panel Final Report -DI Populations project team feedback from Senate -Governance reflection
DATE OF MEETING: 05/07/2019 TIME: 1:00pm - 3:00pm		LOCATION/ROOM #: Submarine Conference Room CALL-IN NUMBER: CALL-IN CODE:
FACILITATOR(S): Sarah Lehmann, Lisa Aguilera Lawrenson
ASSISTANT: Sarah Lehmann, Lisa Aguilera Lawrenson
MEMBERS PRESENT:
INVITED GUEST(S):
SUPPORTING RESOURCES (ITEMS READ IN PREPARATION FOR AND/OR BROUGHT TO MEETING):
Attached Files: FYE Final Report DI Project Charter Draft B
UPDATES AND BRIEF REPORTS:
Topic	Person(s) Responsible	Notes


ACTION ITEMS:
Question	Person(s) Responsible	Notes and Decision(s)	Next Steps
FYE Resource Panel final report	Lisa Aguilera Lawrenson & Sarah Lehmann	The council reviewed the FYE report and discussed feedback to share with the Resource Panel. We agreed to share the following commendations: The Council was very impressed with the FYE report and the team's hard work. • We thought the report had a definite equity focus and we appreciated how equity was well-established throughout the report. • We also thought the report aligns well with ARC’s strategic goals such as “Students First.” • We appreciated how the emphasis was on what practitioners and the institution can do to meet the needs of our incoming students • We were very impressed by the amount of information included. A committee member described the content as “phenomenal.” • We appreciate and were so impressed with the dedication of the team members to produce such a comprehensive report without any re-assigned time. We thought the team did a good job staying on task. • We thought the report was organized effectively and was easy to read. We liked that the Beaver theme was woven throughout. • We liked how the team described trends and characteristics for incoming students • We think this report can help inform the work of the Disproportionate Impact and the Professional Development project teams next year. We also thought the Program Review committee could refer departments to this report when they as what they can do to better serve students. Lisa also plans to share the report with the area deans.

DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Question	Person(s) Responsible	Notes and Next Steps
Discuss feedback and questions from Academic Senate regarding the DI Populations Project Team. -How will the team address intersectionality? Also, Kate will be unable to be at the May 9 Senate meeting when this item is discussed again. Sarah can be there, but would another SSC member be available as well?	Sarah Lehmann & Lisa Aguilera Lawrenson & Kate Williamson	The draft was discussed at ELT yesterday. Feedback from ELT: How will the information be communicated out to the College? We will suggest that the team make recommendations for how to communicate their recommendations. Regarding the risk that some people may not be ready to hear and accept the recommendations - who do we mean? Suggestion to be more specific. Feedback from SSC: We mean members of the college community. Feedback from Jesus Valle: we need to invite elders from all three of the local tribes to participate. It is not appropriate to invite one and not the other two. We will incorporate this feedback into the team makeup. When participants could be either faculty or staff, we need to clarify the process of appointing that person. Need to be mindful about appointments, for example content faculty who are not members of the racial/ethnic communities they study. We need to be cautious about having someone speak about the community and what they need without being part of the community. It's easy to get caught up in the deficit model when you're focused on the research. There will be a need to formulate a process for aligning with the PD project team. Suggestion: regular meetings between project team leads. Jesus Valle shared feedback regarding the team makeup. Jen LaFlam will summarize it and send to the chairs. Question for Jesus: Could there be an opportunity for additional community members to participate without officially being part of the council? For example, a sub-committee or a resource team? Those folks could attend meetings without necessarily being officially appointed to the governance team. Or, there could be focus groups that connect with specific campus/community members whose input is needed. Would one or more of these approaches meet the interest? Jen will follow up. It was noted that none of these groups/categories are monolithic - can't be all things to all people in those groups. This is one of the constraints - no one person can represent the experience of everyone in their group. Question from Senate regarding intersectionality. It is tied to, but separate from, the issue of race and disproportionate impact. It could potentially be its own project team. Should we call out the need to address the needs/interests of folks on campus from diverse religious backgrounds? Do we have data on students' religious backgrounds? We don't think so, because it is not asked in CCC Apply. Where is the right place to mention religious identity? Perhaps it could be added to the list of additional DI groups that we plan to look at in the future. We noted that non-majority spiritual/religious traditions is mentioned in the institutional equity report. Idea: one of the team's meetings could focus on intersectionality. Refugee status also came up in Senate. Concern: be careful of listing some groups but not all groups. For example, API is listed along with other DI groups that are not based on race. Should we describe the need to look at groups with DI without specifically listing them? It was noted that the current list is focused on students but doesn't include employees. Some LGBTQ and Foster Youth students may also be Latinx, African American, or Native American. We understand and are mindful that there are intersectionalities, but also we want to be sure we focus on race because that is the intent of this project team. In the first paragraph, should we change "achievement gap" to something else? It is deficit language. Instead we could say "in order to equitize student success." We should search the document for the term "achievement gap" and consider rephrasing. Should we consider splitting into three groups with a coordinating approach, and inviting each group to create their own membership? No, the Council agreed we should keep the membership for each DI community to 7-9 members, but we recommend that each group invite additional guests or form subcommittees to gather additional input as needed.
Governance Discussion	Adam Karp and Tyler Rollins	Adam Karp and Tyler Rollins facilitated a discussion of the governance process. The results will be summarized in a written report and shared with the councils when it is ready.
ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION:
Topic		Contact Person
NA

Notes - Approved

Meeting Notes