February 18, 2021

Attendees

---

Attending Members:  Alexander, Balducci, Booye (co-chair), Galoyan, Glapion, Hansen, Kirkpatrick, Kobata, LeBleu-Burns, Mandy, Mieso (co-chair), Rafli (DASB), Tran (DASB)

Guests:  Veronica Avila, Lydia Hearn, Kim Palmore

Meeting Items

---

Minutes Approval

There were two amendments to the previous meeting notes and none to the agenda.

---

Guided Pathways Presentation

Lydia Hearn and Kim Palmore presented on their progress with implementing Guided Pathways.

“’Guided Pathways’ is the name for an educational model that creates a more comprehensive and coordinated approach to student success. The idea is to provide clear pathways and integrated support – both academic and nonacademic – to guide students forward through a seemingly vast array of programs, majors, and other options.”

Guided Pathways is divided into the four pillars below:

1. Clarify the Path – create clear pathways to employment and further education
2. Get on the Path – help each student choose and enter a pathway
3. Stay on the Path – help students stay on their paths
4. Ensure Learning – ensure that students learn with intentional outcomes
   
   

Program maps were developed in 2019-20 and Transfer Plan maps will be completed in 2020-21. The six Meta-Majors were approved spring 2020 and they are now in the process of developing the six Villages based on the Meta-Majors to assist students to stay on the path.

• These villages will include resources, community of fellow students and employees, orientation, dedicated spaces, etc.
• With equity in mind, some students do better with relational learning and villages are a metaphoric way of re-organizing work depending on the major.
  
  

Currently they are presenting the Guided Pathways Proposal for the creation of Villages to all the PBTs for review, questions, and suggestions and will be taking it to College Council. Please email them if you have any suggestions or questions about the proposal.

Rafli asked how this would work for a student with a double major or interest?

• Hearn responded that most students with double majors often will be in the same meta-major but if not, a student would likely choose a “home base” meta.
  • The Meta-Majors are not meant to be restrictive and are there to offer students more resources and support for that particular area
  • A student would be able to access the other villages to see what is available to them there regarding their other interests
  • There are many students who are also undecided and would likely visit multiple villages
    
    

Hansen had similar concerns as Rafli regarding flexibility and the ability of students to explore their options and wondered if it could be added to the proposal document.

• While the four pillars cannot be changed due to being defined by the state, flexibility and exploration could be added in other areas.
• Hearn responded that they are checking to see if a student is able to choose a meta-major versus a specific major instead and still be considered in line with the current guidelines in place. This would expand the student's options and would let them explore more interests.
  
  

Glapion asked how they are developing the timeline and getting the input and assistance that they need for the various steps.

• Hearn responded that in a month or two, calls will go out for more assistance and recruiting help with the village portion of the project. Essentially the village project will provide some infrastructure that currently does not exist right now.
• Hansen mentioned that having student housing on campus would possibly assist with development of the villages and Hearn agreed.
  
  

Mieso said the De Anza Guided Pathways Proposal for the creation of Villages will be posted and to please share this information with their constituents.

• More information about Guided Pathways can be found on their webpage.
  
  
  

Member & Program Updates

• Kobata reported from Classified Senate that they have been working on their upcoming Classified Senate goals and continuing their progress on Classified Professional Development Day.
  • They also had a presentation on Classified Senate Restructuring
    
    • Booye commented that this is still a work in progress but it is developing tiers in leadership, mentoring, and teamwork that when finally completed, we can ask for it to be presented to SSPBT.
  • One Book, One College, One Community program was introduced as well.
    
    

• Rafli from DASB said that the new name, DASG, still needs to be voted on by the student body so they are still referred to as DASB for now. Student elections have started and students are campaigning online. They also have an upcoming SRS Resource Fair event coming up February 26th.
  • Tran reported that they are still discussing budget deliberations and that they now have Priority Registration for DASB members. There is also a DNExTalks event coming up this Friday from 4:00-5:00 p.m. with speaker Dawn Shaw.
    
    

• Hansen reported from FA and how they have been working on housing for students and continuing the discussion on the state of shared governance.
  • The 10 +1 Academic Senate responsibilities were discussed and how they could be expanded to other groups on campus. FA will likely reach out to these groups to further this discussion.
    
    

• Galoyan said the state has extended the Pass/No Pass and Emergency Withdrawal (EW) that originally had ended in the fall. They were able to implement this change in 10 days and emails went out to the students yesterday regarding this information. More information regarding this extension can be found on their webpage regarding registration.
  • Galoyan also shared that the Priority Registration project for DASB Senators has been completed and will be available for spring registration.
  • They are in the process of working with ETS regarding the “opt out” option for the student representation fee and improving the true name (preferred name) function in the Banner records to include pronoun and gender options as well.
    
    

• Kirkpatrick reported from ACE that they are encouraging everyone to write letters to their representatives regarding the COLA requirements in the proposed state budget. Currently, the 1.5% COLA amount is contingent on schools adapting specific policies. The union feels this is against what COLA stands for and to maintain a district’s spending power the 1.5% proposed COLA should match the K-12 COLA that is 3.84%.
  • An email was sent out to all ACE members with a template to use for their letters as well.
    
    

• Mandy reported that student disbursements went out this week and the CARES funding will be moving forward in a week or so after receiving clarification on the detail codes so the fund codes can be created for the system.
  
  

• LeBleu-Burns and Avila updated the group on the CAS Standards progress. The committee met and put together a tentative timeline and is in the process of putting the teams together. At this time, not all of the team members have been confirmed.
  • Avila presented the groups and the tentative timeline is as follows:
    • Present roles and teams at SSLT Meeting – Feb. 23, 2021
    • First Version of Self-Assessment Instruments to team leads – by March 19, 2021
    • Finalize Self-Assessment with team leads and members – by April 9, 2021
    • Team member training completed – by May 2021
    • Compile and review documentation – summer through fall 2021
    • Documentary evidence – fall 2021
    • Assessing performance – winter 2022
    • Work time, SLO Convocation – April 2022
    • Final Reports – due mid-May 2022
    • Team presentations – end of May 2022
  • LeBleu said all of the preliminary work will be done this year. The process will be broken up into blocks of time and a draft template will be presented at the Student Services SSLT meeting coming up next week.
    • The programs identified will show the hidden work that tends to be done and help identify the needs and resource assessment for various programs.
  • Tran asked how it was going to work if students selected this year to provide input for the teams may not be available next year.
    • LeBleu-Burns responded that they would reach out to DASB for assistance to make sure students are represented on the teams as needed.
      
      
      

Program Reflection - follow up

Mieso reviewed the timeline for the Program Reflection that is posted on the Program Review webpage along with the Reflection Questions template. The timeline is summarized below:

• Reflection Questions finalized - Thursday, January 21, 2021
• Begin Program Reflection - Thursday, February 4, 2021
• Program Reflection due to Dean for review - Friday, April 9, 2021
• SLO Convocation - Friday, April 23, 2021
• Final due date for all Program Reflections - Monday, April 26, 2021
  
  

Please contact Veronica Avila if you would like to work with her on your reflection or have any questions.

Good of the Order

Members did not have any statements or observations to note at this time.