View Document - ARC Institutional Governance Online Repository (IGOR)

Meeting Notes

NAME OF COUNCIL/TEAM: Student Success Council
OBJECTIVE OF MEETING: -Overview of Homebase Pathway Communities -Discuss feeback mechanism(s) for Homebase Pathway Communities
DATE OF MEETING: 12/17/2019 TIME: 1:00pm		LOCATION/ROOM #: Submarine Conference Room CALL-IN NUMBER: CALL-IN CODE:
FACILITATOR(S): Frank Kobayashi
ASSISTANT: Frank Kobayashi
MEMBERS PRESENT: Kobayashi, Frank Stephenson, Jeffrey Sorensen, Kathryn Windham, Adam Agbunag, Roderic Laflam, Jennifer Williamson, Kate Arata, Eliza
INVITED GUEST(S):
SUPPORTING RESOURCES (ITEMS READ IN PREPARATION FOR AND/OR BROUGHT TO MEETING):
Attached Files: Homebase Powerpoint Homebase FAQ's
UPDATES AND BRIEF REPORTS:
Topic	Person(s) Responsible	Notes
Homebase Pathways Communities	Frank Kobayashi	Frank Kobayashi and Jeff Stephenson shared the concept of Homebase Pathway Communities.

ACTION ITEMS:
Question	Person(s) Responsible	Notes and Decision(s)	Next Steps
		0

DISCUSSION ITEMS:
Question	Person(s) Responsible	Notes and Next Steps
What mechanism(s) can we create to provide feedback to the planning and implementation of Homebase Pathway Communities?	Frank Kobayashi	Concern from the Counseling Department was shared. These concerns included; communication, the involvement of instructional faculty, Counselors feeling they have been doing much of the early work for Achieve, the flow of students, scheduling of Counselors. There was concern shared about going into a space that was "taken" from instructional faculty. There were suggestions about making layout inviting the "collective." A point was made that the STEM Center does much of this work , and could be used as a model. There were concerns raised about who would be the supervisors for each HomeBase. Ideas were generated about who might be involved in an advisory group, this included STEM, Counselors, and stakeholders from each HomeBase. It was suggested to ask Departments, "how can we ensure the staffing/structure will be a complete failure?" The group discussed timeline for the project. Additional questions were generated; 1) what do we want all the HomeBases to have in common? and 2) What will be unique about each HomeBase? It was suggested that a steering committee have equity trained expertise. Additional questions to ask include, 1) What would a HomeBase need to equitably serve all students? and 2) What would you need the HomeBase to do? and 3) What kind of prep and ongoing training will people need? Additional areas of campus to solicit feedback include the LRC, HUB, DI Project Team, Students, and IT. It was stated that asking faculty to have office hours in the HomeBase would be a good start.

ITEMS FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION:
Topic		Contact Person
NA

Notes - Approved

Meeting Notes