General Meeting Information

Date: October 26, 2026
Time: 10 a.m. to 11:20 a.m.
Location: MLC 255

Zoom Link: click here link


  • Agenda

    Time Topic Purpose Discussion Leader
    10:00-10:05 Welcome and Introductions I/D All
    10:05-10:35 Faculty Position Updates I/D/A

    Alisa Omeragic
    Ram Subramaniam

    10:35-10:45

    Approval of Minutes 10/12/2026

    Charge and Norms

    I/D All
    10:45-11:15

    First Read: Program Review Process

    Program Review Inventory List

    "Program" - Working Definition

    First Read: Program Review Feedback Loop

    I/D All
    11:15 - 11:20

    Good to Order

    I/D All
     

    I

    A = Action
    D = Discussion
    I = Information

  • Minutes [DRAFT]

    RAPP Meeting Minutes
    10:00 a.m.-11:20 a.m. | Hybrid Meeting
    Monday, October 26, 2026

    Summary

    Faculty Tri-Chair Veronica Acevedo Avila called the meeting to order, followed by introductions of members and guests. RAPP Members reviewed and approved the October 12, 2026 meeting minutes and reviewed the Charge and Norms webpage. Administrator Tri-Chair Ram Subramaniam shared a faculty position update noting that the broader discussion would be postponed to November 2026. Members reported constituency feedback on the program review process and inventory list. Tri-Chairs Veronica Acevedo Avila and Lisa Ly facilitated discussions on both topics, as well as a draft working definition of a "program" for program review purposes. Due to time constraints, discussion on the program review feedback loop was tabled for the next meeting.


    Faculty Position Updates

    Tri-Chair Ram reported that Vice President of Administrative Services Farhad Sabit and Director of College Fiscal Services Alisa Omeragic were away at a conference and unable to present the faculty position update. However, it was noted at the October 22, 2026, Budget Advisory Committee meeting that funding may be available for up to three faculty positions in 2026–27. Farhad and Alisa will report on budgetary matters as soon as is possible given their work schedules.


    Program Review Process (First Read)

    Tri-Chair Veronica requested feedback from members representing constituency groups regarding the proposed program review process:

    • General Sentiment: Feedback was overall positive regarding the proposal to extend the full program review cycle from three to five years and to stagger programs (~20 programs per cycle) to make the review workload sustainable.
    • Student Concerns: Student members expressed concern that five years might be too long a time span to report updates and/or emerging challenges. Tri-Chair Ram clarified that during the years in which programs were not doing a comprehensive program review, the programs would complete a brief annual update to report progress on goals, significant developments, or new circumstances that impact planning and resource requests.
    • Resource Requests: Members discussed whether program review submissions serve as formal resource requests. The Tri-Chairs clarified that while reflection during program review naturally highlights resource needs, formal resource requests are submitted through a separate process. This separation allows programs to request resources as needs evolve, even if they were not anticipated during the initial full review submission. Tri-Chair Ram reminded members that mechanisms are already in place to allocate instructional equipment and lottery funds to divisions, while the Faculty Prioritization Committee (FPC), a RAPP advisory subcommittee, reviews full-time faculty hiring requests.


    Program Review Inventory List

    Tri-Chair Lisa invited constituency feedback on the draft Program Review Inventory List—an evolving inventory document  across Instruction, Student Services, Academic Support/Collegewide Services, and Equity and Engagement used to stagger the five-year review cycle.

    • Program Organization: Members discussed alignment between program placement on the inventory list and their institutional reporting units. Lisa explained that the inventory list primarily establishes which program undergoes program review, and the specific template a program uses (e.g., a learning community under Instruction might use the Equity & Engagement template) can be finalized by RAPP as needed.
    • Edits & Additions: Minor labeling edits were requested. DALA Representative Adriana Garcia requested that Latinx Empowerment at De Anza (LEAD) be restored to the inventory list. Dean Michelle Hernandez had noted in a prior meeting that LEAD was inactive and planned to discuss its status with Associate Dean of Student Successs and Retention Services Adrienne Hypolite.



    Working Definition of "Program"

    Tri-Chairs Veronica and Lisa led a discussion on a draft document defining a "program" for program review purposes. Veronica read the document aloud and summarized the definition of a program as follows:

    • Categorization: Definitions fall into two categories:
        1. Instructional Programs: Defined per Title 5, Section 5500. An educational program as an organized sequence of courses leading to a specific objective, such as a degree, a certificate, a diploma, a license, or transfer to another institution of higher education, together with the department or discipline that offers it. 
        2. Non-Instructional Programs: Organized offices, services, or support units providing direct delivery in support of student success (including student services, learning support services, and administrative support services).
    • Scope: Veronica explained the draft also outlines the purpose of program review, its mandates, and how results inform institutional effectiveness and strategic planning.
    • Feedback: Initial feedback recommended clarifying that program review templates are designed primarily for reflection. While reflection naturally identifies needs, formal resource requests remain separate.


    Next Steps & Unfinished Business

    • Program Review Feedback Loop (First Read): Unfinished business carried forward to the next meeting.
    • Program Review Process (Second Read): Scheduled for the next meeting.
    • Feedback Collection: Ongoing for the working definition of a "program" and the Program Review Inventory List.

    Attendees: Ram Subramaniam, Veronica Acevedo Avila, Lisa Ly, Michele LeBleu Burns, Manisha Karia, Mari Acob-Nash, Deepa Yuvaraj, Patricia Del Rio, Thomas Bailey, Debbie Lee, Adriana Garcia, Jamie Pelusi, Michelle Hernandez, Tim Shively, Cecilia Hui, Christina Wright, Glynn Wallis, James Yoshida, Joy Kim, Kathy Nguyen, Erik Woodbury (guest), Gabriela Nocito (guest), Hieu Nguyen (guest), Mallory Newell (guest).

    Absent: Farhad Sabit, Jenny Vela, Ka Chun Wong, Alisa Omeragic


    RAPP Voting Members: Ram Subramaniam, Veronica Acevedo Avila, Lisa Ly, Farhad Sabit, Michele LeBleu Burns, Manisha Karia, Mari Acob-Nash, Deepa Yuvaraj, Jenny Vela, Patricia Del Rio, Thomas Bailey, Debbie Lee, Adriana Garcia, Jamie Pelusi, Michelle Hernandez, Tim Shively, Cecilia Hui, Christina Wright, Glynn Wallis, James Yoshida, Joy Kim, Ka Chun Wong, Kathy Nguyen.
     
    RAPP Advisor: Alisa Omeragic  

Documents and Links


Back to Top