Minutes 03/12/1996

An executive session convened at 5:40 p.m., pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice having been duly given.

A special meeting of the Maricopa County Community College District Governing Board was scheduled to be held at 6:30 p.m. at the District Support Services Center, 2411 West 14th Street, Tempe, Arizona.

PRESENT

GOVERNING BOARD
Donald R. Campbell, President, Nancy Stein, Secretary, Ed Contreras, Member, Linda B. Rosenthal, Member, Roy C. Amrein, Member

ADMINISTRATION
Paul A. Elsner, Alfredo G. de los Santos Jr., Rufus Glasper, Ron Bleed, Janice Bradshaw, Raul Cardenas, Jack Twitchell for Larry Christiansen, John Cordova, Art DeCabooter, Stan Grossman, Jim Jacob for Homero Lopez, J. Marie Pepicello, Phil Randolph, Jim Van Dyke for Linda Thor, Joyce Elsner for Tessa Martinez-Pollack, Arnette Ward

ABSENT
STATE BOARD
Jim Ullman

CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by President Campbell.

EXECUTIVE SESSION
President Campbell called for a motion convening an executive session, notice having been previously given. Mrs. Stein was not present at Executive Session.

MOTION 8509
Linda Rosenthal moved that an executive session be convened. Motion carried 4-0.

The meeting recessed at 5:31 p.m.

The Special Meeting reconvened at 6:30 p.m.

INFORMATION ITEM (I-A-1) PROPOSED TUITION AND FEE SCHEDULE- Dr. Glasper presented a revised item for the proposed 1996-97 tuition and fee schedule before the Governing Board that would be brought to the March 26, 1996, Governing Board meeting for approval.

ADJOURNMENT
The Special Meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m.

The Work Study/Strategic Conversation convened at 6:45 p.m.

(II-A) STRATEGIC ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH BOND COMMITMENTS
Lionel Diaz introduced the topic for the conversation as "Planning for New Education Centers" and introduced Betsy Hertzler as the facilitator and the three presenters for the evening. Shelley Randall went over the ground rules. Betsy Hertzler introduced the first presenter, Dr. Rene Diaz, Superintendent, Phoenix Union High School District. Dr. Diaz addressed the topic of shrinking resources and the increase of student counts. He presented the possibilities of collaboration between a high school district and a community college district to enter into an intergovernmental agreement to build a high school on a community college campus where the expectation of that high school would be for students to graduate from high school and move directly into the community college and also offer concurrent enrollment courses to the students. He suggested that discussions take place to discuss the possibility of using bond moneys for this venture. Lionel Diaz then introduced Mary Vanis, who presented guidelines for community planning for a new education center.

In her presentation, Dean Vanis addressed the use of community assets, including community advisory groups, in that community planning builds a sense of ownership for the community where the center will be located and broadens the perspective of the college community and the community at large. Dr. Vanis also discussed how to identify the needs of the service area, and the selection process for forming community advisory groups. Mr. Diaz introduced the third presenter for the evening, Arlen Solochek, who gave an overview of the master planning process for a new education center. The group then broke for small group discussions on three separate sets of questions and reported back as follows:

GROUP ONE
Facilitator and Recorder: Betsy Hertzler and Shelley Randell

Question #1: What are some issues regarding the initial phases of planning a new education center? Include, but do not limit this to the analysis of population, community characteristics, and the possibilities for collaboration and partnerships.

- Concern for changing technology - Overplan - Flexibility - Changing learning spaces - How does site fit into broader community/neighboring sites - Parking capacities/funding issues - lots vs. tiered parking - Public transportation/access - What are the connecting issues among all educational institutions - Duplication across board - what can be different - Partnerships - Balance between traditional and new ideas - Do space equations make sense for 5-25 years from now? - Shift away from traditional paradigms - Diversity, but access to centralized programs - How far will a student drive to get to his or her program? - Identify community needs for curriculum - Needs assessment from community - Campus should be learner-centered - Alternative delivery systems - Access from other sites - home

Question #2: A. Who should be involved in the planning for a new education center? B. Who should review and critique the final report and recommendations?

Part A. - Community - Students - Future users (today's high school students) - Adult users - Immigrant families - Take planning to the PTO's, parents, future students - Go into the classrooms - Governing Board members - Faculty - Staff - People outside community (neighboring communities) Part B. - Students should be involved in final report/recommendations - Existing faculty and staff - Communities agencies - Church groups and leadership - State agencies - Business partnerships - Chambers of Commerce - Local government - Legislators - City Council members

Questions #3: Is the District moving toward more classes and student services via computer with less interaction among faculty and students? What are the issues and problems associated with this type of educational delivery?

- Full-time faculty available to students - What is interaction between student and teacher - Faculty needs avenues/awareness of potentials in using technology - Caution that students may lose the "human touch" - Staff training and development - Additional types of student assessment - Collaboration and discussion/interaction important - Advisement, preparedness - Psychological issues - Internet - Meet by appointment - Alternative and expanded business hours - Accessibility - Student interaction/social - Awareness of what is going on in public schools - Bias that says technology leads to less human interaction - Cost of changing technology - hard to keep up with the pace

GROUP TWO
Facilitator and Recorder: Stacey Ayers and Patti McNeill

Question #1: What are the needs of the students at the Maricopa Colleges?

- Flexibility - Convenience (of time, place) - Affordability/financial help - Social service referrals - Employment opportunities - Transportation - Quality instruction/current programs "up-to-date" - Anticipate future technology - Child care - Learner centered environment - Honors courses, advanced coursework - Alternative class schedule choices - Alternative learning styles - Student services, i.e., counseling/advisement - Alternative scheduling of classes - Compressed or extended courses - Critical thinking, writing, communicating, computing - Library resources - Book exchange/buy backs (affordable) - Alternative delivery - Athletic facilities - Vocational education/occupational services - Social development - Career placement/advisement

Question #2: Are the needs and expectations of Maricopa students changing? If so, how are they changing?

- WWW access - technology - telecommunications - Need for cutting edge technology - More hands on in learning and instruction - Students are consumers - More internships - cooperative education - More competition in the market - Need adaptability to ADA concepts - More minority students in population - Awareness of bilingual issues for students - pro and con issues - Pull more students into master planning roles

Question #3: What are the major issues which the Maricopa college s face in order to meet the needs and expectations of students and their prospective employers?

- Competition - University of Phoenix, DeVry - Need alternative delivery - Change our delivery methods - Move away from traditional academic calendar - We need to be more learner centered (up-to-date, cutting edge) - Change faculty attitudes - Update faculty skills and knowledge - Resource limitations/affordability - Continue changing - Collaboration between educational systems - Accountability to put customers through the system - More industry/student cooperation - Good advisement for transferability - Businesses should articulate needs to colleges - Literacy on all levels - Facilities - Classroom flexibility (moveable furniture) - More distance learning - Guaranteed competency - Identify markets for enrollment management - Job placement - Promotion

GROUP THREE - (Elected to draft their own questions)
Facilitator and Recorder: Pat Honzay and Ken Baer

Question #1: How do we determine the products and services the community wants and needs? What is the process for answering this question?

- Advisory committee (Community) - "Large Universe" - Ask what they want to learn - Diverse voices - Environmental scan - Advisory committee (internal - college and district) - Communicate in "their language" - "modem-delivered instruction" - Focus on end results rather than process - Define some of solution "on the ground" or bring a framework from the beginning.

Question #2: What should the process be for designing the new center?

- New vision ... center, not campus - Identify needs, then hire staff - Balance innovation and traditional - Marketing projections - Do more - Use what we have - Community information - Manage expectations - Ensure quality - org. structure less critical to customer

Plus / Delta
- Good presentations - Misunderstood/A-1 - Good group discussions - Student notification - Good topic - Need more press coverage - Comments/ideas timely on the issues - Raised questions regarding new -Mental model was traditional centers bricks/mortar sites - Wider/broad range of issues from learner centered conversation - Agreed on involving students

ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.