1. Home
  2. Board Operations
  3. Minutes
  4. Minutes 10/16/2007

Minutes 10/16/2007



GOVERNING BOARD
OCTOBER 16, 2007
MINUTES

 

A special board meeting and work session were scheduled to be held at 5:00 p.m. in the Rio Conference Center at Rio Salado College in Tempe, Arizona, pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431.02, notice having been duly given.

PRESENT

GOVERNING BOARD
Linda Rosenthal, President
Don Campbell, Secretary
Colleen Clark, Member
Jerry Walker, Member
Scott Crowley (late)

ADMINISTRATION
Rufus Glasper
Anna Solley
Maria Harper-Marinick
Pete Kushibab
Al Crusoe

Ken Atwater               

Debra Thompson

Kurt Conover for Mary Kay Kickels

Art DeCabooter

Velvie Green

Maria Hesse

Karen Mills for Linda Thor
Gene Giovannini

Ernie Lara

Steve Helfgot
Bernie Ronan

Darrel Huish

 

Attendance: Approximately 70

SPECIAL BOARD MEETING

I. Call to Order:

President Linda Rosenthal called the Special Board Meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.

II. Approval of Agenda:

Dr. Don Campbell moved for approval of the agenda. Motion
approved 4-0 (Mr. Crowley not present during vote.)

III. First Reading Items:

A.1. Public Safety Policy - review the proposed revisions to the existing Public Safety policy as a first step towards the recommended adoption of the changes and revised policy at the October 23, 2007 Governing Board meeting. The most significant changes are to modify the Public Safety policy to establish the standards by which the District’s shall be authorized to carry firearms and to strike the existing regulation that prohibits the District’s certified safety officers and directors from carrying firearms. Chapter 79 of the Laws of 2007 allows certified peace officers to carry firearms in certain locations that otherwise might have prohibited this. Updating of the District’s Public Safety policy is one of several needed steps to implement this law and ensure that all necessary policy adjustments and training are in place for the District’s certified safety officers and directors.

The following represents the revisions recommended:

THE MISSION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AT EACH COLLEGE OR CENTER IS TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE, SAFETY AND SECURITY FOR PEOPLE ON CAMPUS, PROTECTION OF DISTRICT AND PERSONAL PROPERTY, TRAFFIC CONTROL, VISITOR ASSISTANCE, LOST AND FOUND PROPERTY, LOSS PREVENTION AND LOSS REPORTING, IDENTIFICATION OF SAFETY HAZARDS AND TRAINING AND ORIENTATION OF EMPLOYEES AND STUDENTS.

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO A.R.S. §15-1444(9), THE GOVERNING BOARD APPOINTS AS POLICE OFFICERS ALL ELIGIBLE CERTIFIED CHIEFS OF SECURITY AND CERTIFIED SAFETY PERSONNEL. THESE POLICE OFFICERS SHALL HAVE THE AUTHORITY AND POWER OF PEACE OFFICERS.

The Chancellor shall maintain a safe learning and working environment. Accordingly, he or she: shall be charged with designing and implementing the means to maintain college environments that are safe for students, employees and the community at large. This includes identifying and outlining district versus college authority over public safety matters through administrative regulations, and establish district standards of practice for the Department of Public Safety at each college. The Governing Board recognizes that the college safety officers that are certified pursuant to A.R.S. 15-1444(A)(10) have the authority and power of peace officers. THE GOVERNING BOARD AUTHORIZES ITS CERTIFIED SAFETY DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS TO BE ARMED WITH DISTRICT ISSUED FIREARMS AND OTHER SUCH WEAPONS AS MAY BE REQUIRED BY THE DISTRICT. THE ARMING OF OFFICERS SHALL BE PURSUANT TO ARIZONA STATE LAW, ANNUAL OR OTHER REQUIRED FIREARMS QUALIFICATION BY ARIZONA PEACE OFFICERS STANDARDS AND TRAINING (AZPOST) AS WELL AS TRAINING OR OTHER REQUIREMENTS ESTABLISHED BY THE MARICOPA COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE MAY BE PROHIBITED BY LAW OR OTHER RESTRICTIONS SUCH AS PROHIBITIONS ON THE CARRYING OF FIREARMS ON TRIBAL PROPERTY.

ADOPTION OF THIS POLICY HAS THE EFFECT OF ELIMINATING ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATION 4.7 (SECURITY REGULATION).

MONITORING Method and Frequency:
Method: Internal
Minimum Frequency: Ongoing/Matter of Practice

Adopted October 24, 2006 - MOTION NO. 9385

 

A.2. MCCCD Use of Force Policy - review the proposed new policy on the Use of Force as a first step towards the recommended adoption of the policy at the October 23, 2007 Governing Board meeting. This policy establishes the standards for the use of force and all matters related to the use of force. Chapter 79 of the Laws of 2007 allows certified peace officers to carry firearms in certain locations that otherwise might have prohibited this. Adoption of a Use of Force policy is one of several needed steps to implement this law and ensure that all necessary policy adjustments and training are in place for the District’s certified safety officers and directors.

The following represents the revisions recommended:

The Chancellor shall implement guidelines that are adopted by the Governing Board for Maricopa County Community College District (MCCCD) Public Safety Officers on the use of force in the performance of their duties.

POLICY
MCCCD Public Safety Officers will use only the force necessary to accomplish lawful objectives while protecting the lives of the Officer and others. The Control Options Response Chart serves as a guide for the escalation and de-escalation of force. Violation of this policy may result in sanctions as prescribed by MCCCD policy. Additionally, violation of Arizona state law may result in criminal and/or civil penalties in a court of law.

Since use of force decisions are made under exceedingly varied scenarios and often on a split-second basis, all Officers must be provided with the necessary knowledge and training upon which to make such decisions. Officers must also attain and maintain proficiency with firearms, impact weapons, oleoresin capsicum sprays or approved chemical agents, tasers, less-lethal weapons, handcuffs, and other equipment that may be used in the line-of-duty.

A written report will be submitted whenever an Officer discharges a firearm, intentionally or accidentally, for other than training or sporting purposes. An Officer must also submit a written report if he or she applies physical force through the use of any lethal or less-lethal weapon, and/or takes an action that results in or is alleged to have resulted in injury or death of another person.

The District Director of Public Safety will ensure that both criminal and administrative investigations into all incidents involving the use of lethal force are conducted promptly and accordance with the prescribed policy. Incidents involving complaints about other uses of force, e.g., voice commands, pain compliance, etc., will be handled according to MCCCD procedures.

The affected college will temporarily remove from a line-duty assignment, pending administrative review, any Officer whose actions or use of force results in a death or serious physical injury. During this period, provisions for post-incident debriefing and psychological counseling for the involved Officer will be made available.

DEFINITIONS

A. Reasonable Belief:
An Officer's belief or action is reasonable if the facts or circumstances the Officer knows, or should know, are such as to cause an ordinary and prudent person to act or think in a similar way under similar circumstances. The reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable Officer on the scene, in light of the facts and circumstances confronting him or her, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight. Allowances must be made for the fact that Officers often must make split-second judgments in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving.

B. Serious Physical Injury:
Serious physical injury includes physical injury which creates a reasonable risk of death, or which causes serious and permanent disfigurement, serious impairment of health or loss or protracted impairment of the function of any bodily organ or limb.

C. Less-Lethal Force:
Less-lethal force is defined as the use of a technique, weapon, or equipment to stun, temporarily incapacitate, or cause temporary discomfort to a person’s body. Less-lethal force is any use of force other than that which is considered lethal force.

D. Subject’s Actions

1. Passive Resistance
Physical actions that do not prevent an Officer’s attempt at control but may include
verbal responses.

2. Psychological Intimidation
a. A combination of physical signs on the part of the subject who is ignoring
verbal commands that indicate the subject is making mental/physical
preparations before a fight begins.
b. A combination of physical signs which may include, but are not limited to:
clenching/unclenching of fists, setting of the jaw, accelerated breathing, verbal
statements, and/or aggressive facial expressions.

3. Defensive Resistance
a. Physical actions on the part of a subject, who is ignoring verbal commands,
which attempt to prevent the Officer’s control, but do not constitute an assault.
b. Examples include ignoring the Officer’s verbal commands and pulling away,
hiding behind/under objects, pinning arms under the body, thrashing around,
body going rigid, assuming a fighting stance.

4. Danger to Self
Physical actions on the part of the subject resulting in self-inflicted injuries or that
indicate intent to harm one or commit suicide.

5. Active Aggression
Assault with non-deadly physical force.

6. Aggravated Active Aggression
Assault with force which is capable of creating a substantial risk of causing death
or serious physical injury.

7. Dangerous Fleeing Felon
The Officer reasonably believes that it is necessary to prevent the escape of a
fleeing subject and the Officer reasonably believes that:
a. The subject has committed a felony involving the infliction or threatened
infliction of serious physical injury or death.
b. The escape of the subject would pose an imminent danger of death or serious
physical injury to the Officer or another person.

E. Force Options (see Control Options Response Chart)

1. Display of Force
a. Officer Presence.
b. Verbal Commands.

2. Subject Control
a. Techniques that have a minimal chance of injury. Examples: empty hand escort
controls, pressure points, etc.
b. For deployment guidelines refer to policy.

3. Chemical Agents
a. Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) pepper spray. For deployment
guidelines refer to policy.
b. Hand held or weapon-deployed gas/smoke. For deployment guidelines
refer to policy.

4. Intermediate Force Options
a. Hard hands techniques (pain compliance) applied to primary target areas.
Examples: nerve endings and muscle groups, which have a minimal chance of
injury.
b. Taser deployment guidelines/requirements refer to policy.

5. Hard Hand Control
a. Techniques that have more than a minimal chance of injury. Examples: kicks;
elbow, palm, or knee strikes; punches to secondary targets such as joints,
tendons, ligaments, and skeletal structure.

6. Impact Weapons
a. Includes those weapons authorized for use by MCCCD.
b. For deployment guidelines/requirements, refer to MCCCD policy.

7. Lethal Force
Force that is capable of creating substantial risk of death or serious physical injury.

Training
Officers will demonstrate knowledge of Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) and MCCCD’s use of force policy. Prior to initial duties, each officer will receive refresher training on Arizona State law and MCCCD use of force policy.

At least once a year, Officers will receive refresher training on use of force law, relevant case law, and MCCCD polices to include a written assessment component. This training will be developed, coordinated and managed by the District Director of Public Safety. A minimum score of 80% must be attained on the assessment. Failure to achieve a minimum score will subject the Officer to remedial training and reevaluation.

Proficiency skills and continuing education training records will be maintained by the District Director of Public Safety’s Office. The District Director will disseminate periodic reports to the College Directors of Public Safety on Officers and other employees of their Public Safety College Departments. An annual training report will be provided to the Vice Chancellor of Business Services by January 30th of each year on training conducted during the preceding calendar year.

Control Options Response Chart as a Guide
The use of any force is usually reactionary in that the Officer is responding to the subject’s initial or potential actions. The Officer’s use of force is then constantly changing in response to the subject’s actions. The goal in any use of force is to stop the subject’s resistance or assault, using only the amount of force that is reasonable and necessary.

The Control Options Response Chart is a guide to assist Officers in choosing the appropriate level of force to be used to affect the arrest or maintain control over the situation. An Officer’s choice in the level of force may take into account many variables, including, but not limited to:

A. Officer to suspect: size, gender, age, fitness level, combat skills, presence of
multiple subjects, and proximity of backup.

B. Environmental conditions: lighting, weather, clothing, and high danger area.

C. Totality of circumstances: suspect’s danger to self or others, drug and alcohol
influences, injury or exhaustion of Officer, Officer on the ground, mental state
of the suspect, and prior knowledge about the suspect.

CONTROL OPTIONS CHART – (“X” indicates an authorized option)
Note: Progression of control options will normally proceed from left to right on this chart. However, Officers may immediately use any authorized option, if justified.

Handling Suspects After Use of Force Deployment
A. Observe persons subjected to force options for “High Risk Indicators” of Sudden
In-custody death. High risk indicators include:
1. Bizarre/violent behavior (prior to, during, and after arrest).
2. Obesity.
3. Drug or alcohol use.
4. Ineffectiveness of OC.
5. Use of physical restraint techniques.

B. Medical personnel should be summoned whenever the use of force creates a visible
injury, complaint of injury or a suspected injury.

C. Do not allow subjects to remain face down. Once restrained, sit subject upright and
monitor their condition. Transport in upright, seated position.

D. Persons who have been subjected to chemical agents will, as soon as is practical,
after they are under police control, be afforded means of decontaminating to lessen
discomfort.

Use of Force Reporting
A. A Use of Force Supplement form will be prepared and submitted along with an
original incident report in the following instances:
1. When a firearm is discharged for other than training or legitimate recreational or
sporting purposes.
2. Anytime an Officer uses a pain compliance technique on a subject if it results in
alleged or actual physical injury or death.
3. When a less-lethal or lethal weapon is used on a person.
4. When a taser has been deployed, whether contact is made with a subject or not.
5. When action results or is alleged to have resulted in injury or death.

B. A supervisor will be immediately summoned to the scene and will comply with
investigative procedures as required by MCCCD in the following situations:
1. When a firearm is discharged in the line-of-duty.
2. When a use of force results in death, serious injury, or suspected injury.
3. When a subject complains that an injury has been inflicted.
4. When misconduct is alleged or suspected.

Officer and Departmental Response

A. Involved Officer
1. When an Officer discharges his/her weapon either accidentally or officially, the
Officer will immediately:
a. Determine physical condition of any injured person, when the incident is
under control, and render first aid.
b. Request paramedics.
c. Notify dispatch of the incident and location.
d. Notify his/her supervisor.
e. Protect his/her weapon for examination and submit the weapon to the scene
investigator. The weapon will be kept in the condition found after the incident.
The only exception is for the Officer to “check” the safety if necessary. The
Officer will be issued a replacement weapon as soon after the incident as
possible.
f. Refrain from discussing the incident with anyone except for appropriate
MCCCD supervisory personnel and investigating personnel.
g. Prepare a detailed report of the incident unless directed otherwise by the
investigating supervisor

B. Dispatcher
1. The involved dispatcher(s) will:
a. Notify the nearest agency of the situation and request back-up if needed.
b. Dispatch responding units if the situation is still continuing.
c. Notify paramedics and ambulance personnel; get direction from the Officer in
Charge (OIC) where to stage medical personnel.
d. Notify the Officer’s supervisor.

C. College Director of Public Safety
1. The College Director of Public Safety will:
a. Respond immediately to the scene.
b. Establish control of the scene.
c. Secure the perimeter area.
d. Direct Officers present at the scene, and evaluate the need for additional
support.
e. Notify the necessary personnel.
f. Ensure all principal(s) and witnesses are located and kept in separate locations
pending interviews. If more than one Officer is involved, they should also be
separated.
g. Brief appropriate college officials and District Director of Public Safety, and
investigators about the incident.
h. Assist all involved employees. Determine if a debriefing or support group is
needed and make arrangements for them to respond.
i. Ensure a detailed log of the incident to include dates, times, personnel
involved in the investigation, and assignments are made.
j. Notify outside agencies for assistance if needed.

D. Responsibility for the investigation rests with the District Director of Public
Safety
1. The District Director of Public Safety or designee may call upon the assistance
of an outside agency to assist in the investigation.
2. Ensure that a thorough investigation is conducted whenever an Officer
discharges a duty weapon for other than training purposes.
3. Assigned investigators:
a. Proceed immediately to the scene upon being notified.
b. The assigned investigator highest in rank will be responsible for the crime
scene.
c. When a death or serious physical injury is involved a representative from the
appropriate County Attorney’s office or agency with jurisdiction will be
notified.
d. Weapons of the Officer(s) involved in the shooting will be turned over for
examination.
e. All witnesses will be interviewed.
f. The scene will be processed by the assigned investigative team.
g. Pre-interviews of witness employees at the scene will be conducted as a fact
finding mission. Separate interviews will be conducted for each person
involved
h. Initiate an area canvas to locate additional witnesses who have pertinent
information regarding the shooting
4. Witness employee(s) will be interviewed prior to pre-interviewing the involved
Officer(s), unless exigent circumstances exist.
5. If deemed necessary by MCCCD supervisory personnel on the scene, the
involved Officer(s) may be interviewed first.
6. Conduct an on scene critique with the investigators and the County Attorney to
discuss the facts and circumstances of the case
7. Prior to a formal interview with the involved Officer(s), a review should be
made to determine whether an admonition of Miranda warnings is appropriate.
The decision to read Miranda rights will be based on the totality of the
circumstances, and information available at the time of the investigation.
Consultation with the County Attorney’s Office should occur prior to the
admonition of rights

E. Where an Officer’s use of force causes death or serious physical injury, the
significantly involved Officer(s) will be placed on administrative leave until
cleared to return to work by a MCCCD contracted psychologist.

F. The affected college, upon recommendation of the District Director of Public Safety,
may remove any Officer from line-duty, pending review, for any excessive or
inappropriate use of force. All reviews will be completed within 30 days, unless
extended.

G. Internal investigations of an Officer involved shooting or other incidents will be
conducted by an agency designated by MCCCD for the following purposes:
1. To access the scene to gather information for a later internal administrative
report.
2. To monitor interviews of witnesses, including witness officers and employees.
3. Internal investigators will not participate in or be present during the criminal
investigation interview of the Officer(s) who is/are the subject of the
investigation.

Monitoring Method and Frequency
A. Once a Use of Force Supplement is completed and reviewed, the approving college
Director of Public Safety will forward the original incident report and Use of Force Supplement to the appropriate college administrator and a copy to the District Director of Public Safety for review.

B. The District Director of Public Safety in consultation with the affected college
president will determine if there are any policy, training, weapon/equipment and/or
discipline issues which should be addressed.

C. Within two weeks, the District Director of Public Safety will forward the reports and
review to the Vice Chancellor of Business Services.

D. An annual analysis will be completed at the end of each calendar year by the District
Director of Public Safety and submitted to the Vice Chancellor for Business Services.

REFERENCES
ARS 13-105.34, "Serious Physical Injury"
ARS 13-409, “Justification; Use of Physical Force in Law Enforcement”
ARS 13-410, “Justification; Use of Deadly Physical Force in Law Enforcement”


Mrs. Rosenthal requested that provisions for monitoring be included with the proposed policies. She asked if anyone had any questions or comments pertaining to the proposed policies. None being offered, she requested that the items be moved forward for inclusion in the agenda for the October 23, 2007 Regular Board Meeting.

Adjournment of Special Board Meeting: 5:05 p.m.

 

WORK SESSION
Following a short intermission after the Special Board Meeting, the Work Session on Discounted Dreams: High Hopes and Harsh Realities at America’s Community Colleges was called to order at 5:34 p.m. by Vice Chancellor of Business Services Debra Thompson. She directed attention to the viewing of a video with the same title as tonight’s work session. She further indicated that there would be a panel discussion and table discussions based upon the video. The video ran through 6:30 p.m.
Following the video, Dr. Steve Helfgot, Vice Chancellor of Student Development and Community Affairs, directed attention to the student panel comprised of the following individuals:

1. Tara Woods: Attending Mesa Community College and plans to major in art or pharmaceutical studies. She graduated from Corona del Sol High School and is a student worker in the Advisement Office.

2. Fabian Avila: Attends Phoenix College and is participating in the Culinary Arts Program on a full-time basis. He indicated he was kicked out of high school and later on received his GED. He is a work study student and holds no other form of employment.

3. Karina Cornejo: Attends Phoenix college and is a nursing student. He is a high school dropout who later received her GEC. She is a single mother of two children. She works part-time.

4. Olivia Karr: Attends Glendale Community College fulltime and is majoring in political science. She graduated from high school and works fulltime.

The student panel participated in discussion pertaining to the following questions:

1. What things did they share in common with the students profiled in the video?
• Grew up in Los Angeles and education was not something family or friends did. Has had to wait for classes in science and math. Teachers and counselors at Phoenix College have been great. Tutoring has helped.
• Related to Jose because of culinary classes. Lived in a run down neighborhood and is looking for a better life. Persistence is important because where he grew up education was not important. Has goals and is striving to reach them. Hardships make him stronger. Gets bored and loses focus.
• Lots of requirements regarding financial aid. Gave up because she kept getting turned down.

2. What challenges or difficulties affected their going to school?
• Finding time to study. Taking math and that will be difficult. May not have enough time to study but will have to make time.
• Difficult to study when you have kids. Tells them she has to do her homework and they cooperate.
• Has to work 30 hours per week. Everyday life issues. Faced with obstacles. Trying to achieve a dream. Wants to give children a better opportunity and serve as a role model. Has received help from her counselor at Phoenix College.
• No obstacles other than car problems.

3. What advantages were there to working on campus?

4. Who has made a difference in their lives?
• Reporter for CNN in Hong Kong.
• Mother because she always believed in her.
• Five sisters and mother
• Parents were very supportive.

5. When they complete their education at the community college level, will they be prepared for the workplace?
• Has prepared her to do her current job better. Is able to speak before people now with confidence.
• Hands on training has definitely helped.
• Confidence has increased by taking college classes.

6. What can be done better? What is not being done?
• Teachers should not discourage students. They encourage them to drop classes if they are too difficult. They should do whatever they can to help students succeed.
• Teachers encourage dropping classes if they feel they can’t handle them.
• Has not had any problems.
• Change lottery system for biology classes.
• People of all ages in classroom and teachers may have a tough time relating to everyone.
• In one class the instructor required an autobiography which helped teacher understand students better.
Dr. Maria Harper-Marinick, Vice Chancellor of Academic Affairs, provided instruction for table discussions. Each table was to engage in 40 minutes of discussion centered on questions found at each table. Following the discussion, report-outs would be made on one barrier to student success and one recommended action to remove the barrier.
Discussion questions were:
• Is providing access to students enough? How committed is our institution to the success of our students? What evidence do we have of our commitment?
• Do we have adequate information about the success of our students? How are we putting our data to use? What do we need to know more about?
• In our community and our colleges, what are the barriers that students may face in persisting and in attaining their goals?
• What can we do as a system to remove the barriers and help our students to succeed?

Report Outs:

Table 1: Financial situation. Not knowing what the need to do to succeed. Need to do a better job upfront of explaining what they will face.

Table 2: Financial. Define funding models to possibly attend fulltime.

Table 3: Students are not able to enroll in science classes. Look at dual enrollment so that students can possible take science classes during high school.

Table 4: Continue to do same things but expect different results. Define student success based on their expectations.

Table 5: Still running college on what administrators think they need to do not what students want. Need to place students first and keep students engaged.

Table 6: Employees who discourage students. Need to conduct customer service training and change attitudes.

Table 7: Place students correctly so that they will not be overwhelmed. Recommend more detailed attention to appropriate placement to be successful. Students are often unable to attend college because of time and money. Increase on-campus employment and provide more tutors.

Table 8. Students are academically unprepared for college. Need to go into K-12 system and address issues.

 

ADJOURNMENT: The meeting concluded at 8:08 p.m.

___________________________
Dr. Donald R. Campbell
Governing Board Secretary

 

Summary Report to the Governing Board
Discounted Dreams:
High Hopes and Harsh Realities at America’s Community Colleges
Work Session
Tuesday, October 16
5:30 – 8:30 p.m.
Rio Salado College Conference Center

The Work Session was planned by Vice Chancellors, Dr. Maria Harper-Marinick (Academic Affairs), Dr. Steve Helfgot (Student and Community Affairs), and Ms. Debra Thompson (Business Services), and Rio Salado President, Dr. Linda Thor.

The Work Session was designed around the PBS documentary Discounted Dreams: High Hopes and Harsh Realities at America’s Community Colleges, a production of John Marrow and Learning Matters, Inc.

1. Video Presentation

During the first part of the Work Session, participants were shown the Discounted Dreams video in its entirety (approximately 55 minutes). The documentary addressed the following:

Community colleges are the fastest growing segment of American higher education – and some say the most vital to America’s future. Without them, the American economy would grind to a halt. Today 12 million students attend 1200 community colleges nationwide, lured by their affordability, open admissions policy, and flexible schedules. But growing enrollment is straining the system, underfunding persists, and in spite of some remarkable success stories, less than a third of students who hope to earn a credential from a community college or transfer to a 4-year institution actually succeed.

At a time when our country’s economic competitiveness increasingly depends on its ability to educate its people, community colleges are expecting a tidal wave of enrollment, including more minorities, more low-income students, and more under-prepared students than ever before. So the question arises: How do we offer affordable higher education to millions and make it work?

2. Panel: Students’ Voices

The video presentation was followed by a panel. Four students participated as panelists:
Tara Woods, who attends Mesa Community College and plans to major in art or pharmaceutical studies. She graduated from Corona del Sol High School and is a student worker in the Advisement Office.
Fabian Avila, who attends Phoenix College and is participating in the Culinary Arts Program on a full-time basis. He indicated he was kicked out of high school and later on received his GED. He is a work study student and holds no other form of employment.
Karina Cornejo, who attends Phoenix College and is a nursing student. He is a high school dropout who later received her GEC. She is a single mother of two children. She works part-time.
Olivia Karr, who attends Glendale Community College full-time and is majoring in political science. She graduated from high school and works fulltime.

The student panel participated addressed the following questions:
• What things did they (students) share in common with the students profiled in the video?
• What challenges or difficulties affected their going to school?
• What advantages were there to working on campus?
• Who has made a difference in their lives?
• When they complete their education at the community college level, will they be prepared for the workplace?
• What can be done better? What is not being done?

3. Small-Group Conversations

As the third and last part of the work session, participants engaged in structured conversations and were asked to discuss the following questions based on what they had heard and seen on the video and the responses from the student panelists:
• Is providing access to students enough? How committed is our institution to the success of our students? What evidence do we have of our commitment?
• Do we have adequate information about the success of our students? How are we putting our data to use? What do we need to know more about?
• In our community and our colleges, what are the barriers that students may face in persisting and in attaining their goals?
• What can we do as a system to remove the barriers and help our students to succeed?

Each group was asked to report out one barrier to student success and one recommended action to remove the barrier:
Table 1: Financial situation. Not knowing what the need to do to succeed. Need to do a better job upfront of explaining what they will face.
Table 2: Financial. Define funding models to possibly attend fulltime.
Table 3: Students are not able to enroll in science classes. Look at dual enrollment so that students can possible take science classes during high school.
Barrier: Students not able to enroll in science classes. Action: Review scheduling; review how quickly classes close; dual enrollment in science.
Table 4: Continue to do same things but expect different results. Define student success based on their expectations.
Barrier: Doing the same things expecting different results. Action: Define student success based on student objectives NOT degree completion.
Table 5: Still running college on what administrators think they need to do not what students want. Need to place students first and keep students engaged.
Barrier: We’re still running the colleges we think students need (i.e., we’d all be working a split shift). We’re slow to change. Place students first when making decisions ask “what is the impact on students?” Engage students with each other, with teachers and staff, and with the material/content.
Table 6: Employees who discourage students. Need to conduct customer service training and change attitudes.
Barrier: Faculty and employees who discourage students and who are burned out and unhappy with jobs. Lack of customer service > need training to improve attitude. Be honest and face issues, take action, follow-up.
Table 7: Place students correctly so that they will not be overwhelmed. Recommend more detailed attention to appropriate placement to be successful. Students are often unable to attend college because of time and money. Increase on-campus employment and provide more tutors.
Barrier: Misaligned expectations: students; K12 > college. Action: More detailed attention to appropriate placement.
Table 8. Students are academically unprepared for college. Need to go into K-12 system and address issues.
Barrier: Students academically under prepared from K-12. Action: Early intervention in K-12 to reduce need for remediation.

Summary responses to discussion questions

1. Is providing access enough? How committed is our institution to the success of our students? What evidence do we have of our commitment?

Access is not enough, especially if students do not have the resources necessary.
Access to college (classes) is not enough; access to services (e.g., tutoring and financial aid) is critical.

Access is really not enough if students can’t get into the classes they need.

Issues of re-entry students need to be addressed.

Resources are available but students may not be aware of the resources. Improve communication with students.

Institutions are committed to student success demonstrated by programs like Honors and First Year Experience, 24-hour tutoring services, math and writing centers, etc. However, in other areas the commitment is questioned: there aren’t enough advisors and services for re-entry students may have been cut. Commitment is accountability.

Need to define “success.”

Mandatory placement should be considered.

New models for delivery should be considered.

Financial structure is at odds with supporting students. Funding model inhibits success.

2. Do we have adequate information about the success of our students? How are we putting our data to use? What do we need to know more about?

Colleges and District have reporting in place, but we do not have adequate information about student success.

Need to know more information about “swirling” students. Need to track students.

Need to know why students are taking the courses they take (student motivation). Need to know specifically why they drop and do not return.

Not enough information about student’s ability to take a course. We have placement testing for some courses but not all courses.

Assessments are generally inadequate of faculty performance, and curriculum preparation and development.

MCCCD is more employee friendly than student friendly.
Duplicative programs
Programs, initiatives, and services are added but never subtracted
Data are not consistent; not used for decision making

3. In our community and our colleges, what are the barriers that students may face in persisting and in attaining their goals?

• Financial situation, rising costs, financial aid
• Transportation
• Child care
• Time commitment/part-time status:
o Family obligations
o Work obligations
• Need for career counseling
• Under-prepared for college-level work. Misaligned expectations (students and teachers in K-12)
• Placement of students at incorrect course levels
• Lack of attitude of perseverance
• Faculty and staff who discourage students and who are burned out
• Lack of focus on customer service
• Prop 300

4. What can we do as a system to remove the barriers and help out students to succeed?

• Be honest and face issues, take action, and follow-up.
• Place students first – when making decisions ask “what is the impact on students?”
• Define student success based on student objectives and not degree completion.
• More detailed attention to appropriate placement.
• Prerequisite (placement score required for PSY101, PS, HIS).
• Engage students with each other, with teachers and staff, and with the material/content.
• Establish learning communities.
• More flexibility with delivery of courses and services; non-traditional ways to provide service; e.g., shorter classes, 8 weeks.
• More innovative, more collaborative, more supportive institutions.
• We need to more consistently provide online information available to students. Help them get started and they have to take ownership and commit to it.
• More advisors.
• Scholarships – seek more financial solutions.
• Increased on-campus employment.
• Create more bridges between high school and college students. Have students go back to their respective high schools to recruit.
• Work with high school counselors who view community colleges as fall-back plan.
• Early intervention in K-12 to reduce the need for remediation.