Back to De Anza College Home Academic Senate
De Anza College | Faculty Directory

Notes - May 10, 2004

De Anza Academic Senate
Approved Notes for the meeting of
May 10th, 2004

Senators and Officers present: Araki, Bryant, Clavijo, Cole, Cordero, Dolen, Fisher, Goodwin, Guitron, Illowsky, Joplin, Kline, Linthicum, Logvinenko, Lopez-Morgan, Mitchell, Mujal, Olsen, Salah, Sheirich, Raschall, Tipton, and Winters
Senators and Officers absent: Bresnan, Hearn, Pierce, Setziol, Singh, Weisner
DASB Student Representatives: Anthony Choice
Classified Senate:
Administrative Liaison:
Guests: Anne Argyriou, Carol Cini, Sarah Gahan, Jen Myhre, Karl Schaffer, Tim Shively

Before the meeting started there was a request for follow-up on the print shop rumors from the last meeting in April. Mitchell said that a report had been made at the 5/3 meeting but that he would answer individual questions from those who had missed that meeting later if they would contact him.

[Note: Thank you to Nancy Olsen for contributing substantial portions of these meeting notes.]

The meeting was called to order at (about) 2:35.

I. Approval of Agenda and Minutes. The agenda was approved with one change. Item IIIa was added: a report from the Election Committee. Draft meeting notes were approved with no changes.

II. Needs and Confirmations. Illowsky announced that 2 faculty members are still needed as alternates for the Professional Relations Committee. Illowsky also announced that Luis Limcolioc was up for confirmation as a member of the tenure review committee for Marrietta Reber. Confirmed. III. Email/Spam Report. Carol Cini attended the meeting as senate representative on the Spam Subcommittee of ETAC. She reported on the committee’s work, enumerating issues that the subcommittee is considering, including privacy vs. freedom of speech, concern about the district firewall not distinguishing between legitimate/illegitimate email, the end of what she described as “quarantining” or email, concerns about reading flagged (as spam or virus-bearing) email to determine why it was flagged. She reminded faculty about the email addresses to which one may forward inaccurately flagged spam (or non-spam) email, and reminded faculty that they may use features of their email programs to help deal with spam and flagged messages. Mitchell voiced suggested that there should be a policy that it is unacceptable for spam/virus blocking software to block any legitimate messages, and he raised concerns that some email “blacklists” might cause our system to stop mail from legitimate domains. She will take faculty concerns back to the subcommittee.

IIIa. Election Committee Report. Mary Ellen Goodwin distributed a sign-up sheet for volunteers needed to staff the polling table on the two election days. After the sheets returned for a first pass around the table with numerous open times still available, Goodwin and Mitchell subjected the senators to increased levels of guilt and sent them around once again, resulting in more volunteers. Four slots remained unfilled at the end of the meeting.

IV. Bookstore Report. Held over until May 17 or May 24 meeting since no one from the bookstore was present to speak.

V. Division Equity Report. After an introduction by Winters, Jen Myhre gave a summary of efforts underway and planned in the Social Sciences Division.

VI. Reorganization Draft. Mitchell passed out a sheet containing a draft of some current thinking by the college administration about reorganization. Much of the material in the draft is still “under discussion” but senators are asked to forward questions and comments (their own and those of their division faculty) to Dan Mitchell who will share them with the administration. There was some discussion of the place of distance learning in the reorganization, particularly concerning the idea that “teaching with technology” and “distance learning” are not regarded as synonymous by faculty, along with the question of whether oversight of classes using technology belongs in a separate distance learning program or in the academic divisions in which those courses reside. Some suggested that greater support for classroom technology might be a higher priority than the expansion of distance learning options.

VII. Textbook Policy. The senate resumed the discussion of textbook policy, again using the approach suggested by Winters and used with success at the previous meeting, in which each senator (and others in attendance) had an opportunity to indicate general agreement or disagreement with the proposed language and to briefly comment and offer suggestions. Under Best Practices there was general agreement with the wording on Cost, with comments reflecting earlier discussions about copies of textbooks on reserve and policies about requiring students to have text materials in order to enroll. Other issues included easy access to photocopy services, the concept of faculty “discretion” over text choice, and the possibility of a DASB textbook fund to provide reserve copies. Moving on to the Bookstore section of the proposal, the discussion moved to Prices in the bookstore. While there was essentially unanimous agreement that minimizing textbook costs is a good thing, concerns included the danger of micromanaging bookstore operations. After lengthy discussion there seemed to be a sentiment that goals of this section are to make a strong statement about keeping textbook prices low as a matter of principle while steering clear of trying to micromanage the operation of the bookstore. The discussion then turned to Bookstore textbook availability. In general there was overall agreement with the text of this section with only three dissenting votes. There were concerns about the strength of the language (or lack thereof) regarding instances of the bookstore reportedly failing to order sufficient textbooks for some classes, and doing so repeatedly. There was some discussion about making this a separate senate issue before the full textbook policy is approved. Another concern was with timely ordering of books by the bookstore, after which someone muttered words to the effect of “and timely orders by faculty.” After it was suggested that the bookstore should order enough texts to always have extras on hand, it was noted that this might have an adverse effect of the bookstore’s ability to lower costs.

VIII Good of the order. In no particular order and possibly with some omissions…
  • Mitchell reminded senators of the “May Revise” due this week and what it means.
  • Mitchell noted John Lovas’ article on Ethics of Textbook Selection at the Faculty Forum Web site ( and invited faculty to read it and respond.
  • Karl Shaffer distributed his handouts about a visit to the bookstore and a conversation with Robert Kreiser.

The meeting adjourned at approximately 4:35.
 Updated Wednesday, May 19, 2004 at 5:03:16 PM by Academic Senate -
Login | Logout | NewsItems