| CSEA Updates |
| - CSEA Ongoing Activities |
| - CSEA Advocacy and Support |
| - Academic Council Updates |
| - Faculty Updates |
| - Faculty Spotlight |
| - Featured Article |
| - Know Your Contract |
| - CSEA Representatives |
CSEA Updates
The CSEA Executive Committee is working on the following issues:
1) Bargaining Preparation – Contract negotiations are tentatively scheduled to begin sometime in March 2014. The bargaining team will consist of Kevin James – Mathematics Department; Tom Shanahan – Paralegal Studies; Amy Brubaker – Human Resources Management; Adam Keller – Biological and Physical Sciences; T.J. Duda – Mathematics; Ingrid Emch – English; Eric Neubauer – Social Sciences; and Diane Fidelibus – Human Services. The team is in the process of reviewing the contract to identify issues that will need to be addressed in bargaining. Once that process is completed, a survey will be developed and distributed to the membership. For security reasons, we would like to distribute the survey to our members using personal email addresses. We are asking our Association Representatives to begin collecting these from our members. Please send a personal email address to your Representative. A complete list of current Reps is at the end of this newsletter.
Once the issues have been identified and prioritized, the bargaining team will put together research teams to develop proposals that address the issues. Watch for more information later this semester.
2) Faculty Chairs – The executive committee has been having discussions about removing some of the barriers that make it difficult for faculty to transition into and out of the Department Chairperson role. Both Dr. Harrison’s administration and CSEA have expressed an interest in making changes to the Chairperson position in order to accomplish this goal. CSEA has requested that a joint research team be formed to study the problem and find a way to accomplish the goals shared by both parties. The current use of interim chairpersons has been very helpful in identifying many of the issues that need to be resolved. However, the current situation is not one that can continue for much longer. We will see if Dr. Harrison’s Administration is serious about implementing real change, or if this has been a diversion.
3) Strategic Enrollment Management (i.e. Scheduling) – Dr. Harrison’s administration continues to try to cut instructional costs by increasing the average class size for all sections. CSEA continues to have conversations with them in order to better understand the data they claim drives the decisions surrounding scheduling. Faculty, Department Chairpersons, and the Deans have expressed concerns over the decision to limit the initial offerings that students can register for this spring. Additionally, they question the cancelation of low enrollment sections. Dr. Harrison’s administration claims that while not canceling low enrollment sections last spring did lead to a larger enrollment than projected, it also led to a loss of around 2 million dollars due to increased instructional costs. We have asked to see the documentation that supports this claim.
The decision to not open additional sections until one is filled demonstrates a lack of understanding of the way many Career and Tech programs operate. Many have evening programs and day programs due to student work schedules. Many Career and Technical programs are sequential. Some Career and Tech faculty have expressed concern that these ill thought out policies will cause the end of their programs. This will have a ripple effect on Arts and Sciences since there will be fewer Career and Tech students needing their general education classes. Career and Technical faculty already have expressed concern that Dr. Harrison's administration lacks understanding of Career and Tech programs (e.g. advising).
CSEA is collecting concrete examples that demonstrate the flaws in the decisions made by Dr. Harrison’s administration. If you can provide examples of how strategic enrollment management is damaging your program, please send these examples to the Association Representative for your department.
4) 60-Hour Mandate – Dr. Harrison’s administration has mandated that all programs reduce their degree requirements to 60 hours. With the legislatures in Texas and Tennessee passing laws requiring all two-year degrees to be 60 hours, the fear is that our legislature will consider forcing a similar change on the colleges in Ohio. CSEA is aware of the damage this will do to the programs at Columbus State. We are working to see what other two-year colleges in Ohio are doing about this issue. Early conversations with Dr. Harrison and Dr. Cooley indicate that they are also aware that this mandate is not good for our students. They are working with the Ohio Board of Regents to delay the implementation and possibly to allow more flexibility in the 15 hours of Basic Related courses. Dr. Harrison has asked faculty to reach out to your advisory committees, your accrediting agencies, and the employers who hire your students to get their aid in making the case of how damaging this mandate is.
On a more positive note, Dr. Harrison’s administration has reached out to the CSEA leadership to invite us to participate in the following initiatives:
- Achieving the Dream and the Student Success Initiatives – As we transition from a year of planning to a year of implementation in the Achieving the Dream process, Dr. Harrison would like to reorganize some of the Achieving the Dream structures. He has indicated that he would like to fold in the larger Student Success agenda into the Achieving the Dream implementation. It is unclear exactly how this will end up, but CSEA takes it as a positive sign that Dr. Harrison has asked for our input as new structures are considered.
- Great Colleges to Work For Survey – For the last two years, employees have been asked to participate in the Chronicle of Higher Education’s Great Colleges to Work For. The survey is administered by Modern Think. The data from the 2012 survey identifies communication and issues with senior leadership as significant challenges that face Columbus State. The trends appear to continue in the 2013 data, but the detailed results have not yet been released. CSEA has been asking Dr. Harrison’s administration to use this data constructively. Just this month, CSEA was contacted to provide a representative to a work group, consisting of the leadership of the various employee groups or their designees, to move this initiative forward.
CSEA Ongoing Activities
1) A reminder that faculty members will need to vote in-person to ratify/reject the In-Term Bargaining Agreement for the changes made to the Academic Calendar sometime in October. Be on the lookout for an email from CSEA President Kevin James announcing the dates, times, and location to cast your vote.
2) The CSEA Faculty Excellence Award winners for Spring Semester 2013 will be announced sometime in October. Winners will receive an award and a check for $500. Dr. Harrison has also agreed to designate a reserved parking space for award winners, starting with this year’s winners. Both the CSEA Executive Committee and the CSEA Faculty Excellence Award Committee encourage all faculty members to nominate deserving colleagues. Information regarding the award and submission form can be found at https://www.cseafaculty.org/Excellence.html. If you have any additional questions regarding the award or submission process, please contact Rita Rice at 287-5818 or rrice@cscc.edu.
CSEA Advocacy and Support
The following is a recent email originally sent to CSCC faculty members by Darrell Minor, Mathematics Department and CSEA Communications Committee member. It is reprinted here (with minor edits) with his permission.
All,
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/opinion/perspectives/death-of-an-adjunct- 703773/#ixzz2fHW6GIrN
The above article is from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. It is a sad story, but one that is likely more common than we care to ponder, about the plight of a long-term adjunct faculty member who ended up dying in poverty due to low pay and the lack of health insurance.
Perhaps the Affordable Care Act will help folks similarly situated in the future (time will tell) with the health insurance aspect of this person's situation; but it appears that many colleges are moving in the wrong direction regarding the over-reliance on adjunct faculty, their low pay, and the limited number of courses they are allowed to teach.
The CSCC Organizing committee contributes the following:
The CSCC Organizing Committee welcomes all interested classified staff to participate in our next meeting. Please contact us or visit our website for more information.
Website: http://csccsweets.ohea.us
Email: csorgcomm@gmail.com
Academic Council Updates
The following is an update on items that have been approved at the last two "Academic Council" (formerly "OAA Co-Chairs Committee") meetings. Approved minutes and agendas for each meeting are also available on Blackboard ("Academic Affairs Faculty Committees Organization").
1) Recommendations from the Service-Learning Committee. The recommendations included a rubric to determine whether a course should be considered as a service learning course, and identifying courses that have been approved as service learning courses with an "S-Designation" in the college catalog and on student transcripts. The goal is to have courses identified for autumn 2014.
2) Recommendation from the Academic Rules and Policies Committee regarding a minimum GPA for graduation. Suggested edits to Policy 5-08 were made to clarify that students are required to have a minimum cumulative 2.000 GPA in all college level courses to be considered for graduation.
3) Recommendations from the Academic Rules and Policies Committee regarding the reverse transfer process. The Ohio Board of Regents is urging community colleges to establish reverse transfer policies with four-year universities. This serves to more accurately reflect the number of students who complete degree requirements for an Associate's degree. It also enables students who may not petition to receive an Associate's degree but instead transfer to a four-year university, but then fail to complete the requirements of a four-year degree (for whatever reason) to petition to receive their Associate's degree retroactively. It does decrease the number of hours (per OBOR guidelines) that are required to be taken at Columbus State from 23 down to 20. It is an effort to streamline the process and should result in more Associate's degrees being awarded from Columbus State, to students who completed all degree requirements.
4) Recommendation from the Student Support Committee to implement a wait list for students wishing to register for sections that are at full capacity. There was extensive discussion (over several meetings) on this topic, and members of the Student Support Committee and of the Academic Council recognize the challenges that implementing a wait list may pose in regards to technology and necessary cultural changes. Ultimately, in the interest of student success, the Academic Council members are recommending that a wait list process be implemented.
5) CSCC will be migrating to a Microsoft 365 system for our email and calendars in December. Novell’s Groupwise will no longer be used on campus. No email messages should be lost as a result of this migration, but just in case messages are lost due to glitches, it is recommended that crucial email messages be printed prior to December. Especially for those faculty who may need them for their promotion portfolios.
Also, Tracy Little (Professor, Social Sciences) will be assuming the role of Academic Council coordinator beginning spring 2014.
Finally, there are vacancies on the following committees. Contact one of the co-chairs if you are interested in joining, or for more information.
1. Instructional Success Committee (Scott Laslo and Mark Bocija) - 1 C&T vacancy
2. Student Support Committee (Amy DiBlasi and Eric Neubauer) - 1 A&S vacancy
3. Service Learning Committee (Lisa Briggs and Nancy Pine) - 1 A&S vacancy
4. Honors Committee (Amy DeLorenzo and Becky Mobley) - 1 C&T vacancy
There are 10 OAA Committees, and most of the committees have 10-14 members (the Promotion & Tenure Process Committee has 8 members). A process for electing/selecting committee members is being discussed by a faculty committee, and recommendations are likely to be made very soon regarding that process.
Faculty Updates
New Faculty
CSEA would like to welcome our newest colleagues here at Columbus State Community College and extend our best wishes to them for the current semester and subsequent terms hereafter. As a reminder, all first year tenure track faculty should receive reassigned time to release them from one class (up to 4 semester hours).
We welcome the following new tenure-track faculty:
Anjali Gupta, Biological and Physical Sciences
Julie Posey, Biological and Physical Sciences
Erica Robertson, Nursing
And welcome to the following new annualized contract faculty:
Erik Aagard, Mechanical Engineering Technology
Ali Ola, Biological and Physical Sciences
Deborah Brown, Health Information Management
Crystal Danley, English
Melissa Marmie, Business Management
Patricia May-Woods, Early Childhood Development
Betsy McCall, Mathematics
Eleanor Optiz, Modern Languages
Julie Rengert, Biological and Physical Sciences
Susanna Robbins, Humanities
John Wetzel, Mathematics
Jessica Wohlgamuth-Benedum, Biological and Physical Sciences
LaKesha Wyse, Nursing
Stacy Yeager, Medical Lab Technology
Myra Young, Mathematics
Distinguished Full Professor Awards
CSEA would like to extend its congratulations to the following Distinguished Full Professor Awards winners for 2013:
Jeff Bates - Environmental Science Safety and Health
Kelly Hogan - Academic Affairs
Brenda Johnson – Veterinary Medicine
Darrell Minor - Mathematics
Steve O’Neal – Landscape, Design, & Building
Faculty Spotlight
For this issue, the CSEA Communications Committee interviewed Dr. Mary Lewis, a Psychology Instructor. Mary taught at Columbus State as an adjunct for 8 years. She then served the college as an ACF for one year and has been a Full-time tenure track faculty in the Psychology Department for 1 ½ years. She trained as a Counseling Psychologist and is very active in the Ohio Psychological Association (OPA) and American Psychological Association (APA).
What were the challenges of leaving part time to go full time?
People assumed I knew more about the college than I actually did. Probably because of the time I spent here as an adjunct and especially as an ACF. During the year as ACF, I participated with the Psychology Faculty Learning Community; one of our projects was the updating of the Psychology Department’s Adjunct Policy Manual. I guess it was natural for folks in the Department and College to assume that I knew more than I actually did about Columbus State and its operations.
The orientations were difficult to schedule/attend, transitioning from a fulltime Psychology practice. This is probably a discipline specific issue.
What are the pros of becoming a full time instructor?
Certainly affordable health care is high up on my list. Also I like having more control in scheduling my courses. There are some small, but important things like the new title/position, having an office of my own, and even my nameplate on the door of my office. “Small things can be very meaningful”. And these small things can go on to affect my rapport with my students; it is much more comfortable to meet with students in my office than a shared space.
I would also add that the four hours of new faculty reassigned time the first year was very welcome and provided me a good opportunity to get adjusted.
Another benefit that wasn’t immediately apparent: I can bring real food and eat it in my office. No more eating behind the wheel while driving between my practice and the college. This means healthier (and hot) meals now and again rather than those meals being the exception.
And finally, I am able to spend more time with fulltime faculty and this increases my general sense of collegiality in the department and college.
What are the benefits of CSEA membership or how has CSEA helped them?
I like that someone is bargaining on my behalf and I find the fact that they are there comforting; to have help if I ever need it.
Now that you are well into your second year are there any additional positives that you have discovered after your first year?
I have a greater sense of self-efficacy in advising my students about resources available at Columbus State. I have also made a greater number of connections and those connections are expanding beyond my department into the division and the college. I now recognize more names when they are mentioned, that is I have increased familiarity with a larger number of faculty and administrators.
Featured Article
CSEA Communications Committee member Mark Polifroni provides his analysis of the results of the recent CSEA Health Care Survey.
CSEA Member Health Care Survey Analysis
Our recent health care survey solicited member responses to seven health care issues being considered by CSEA and Columbus State. Two approaches were taken to summarize this data. The first approach was to simply tabulate and present “yes/no” responses to the questions to gain a basic understanding of the issue. These data are presented in the accompanying tables as well as bar graphs. The second approach was to summarize the many comments that were given by our brothers and sisters on the health care issues that concern us all. These data illuminate the underlying policy concerns and may be fodder for future investigation. These data are summarized in the pie charts.
The categorical data set of the second approach followed accepted categorical coding techniques employed in survey research. First, the comments were read in their entirety and preliminary conceptual categories were created (by the author). Then the “raw” conceptual categories were condensed/combined as deemed appropriate to both ensure the richness of the variability in the responses while the benefits of summarization were maintained. Independent coders then categorized the data for each question.
One striking observation based on the data is the visceral negative reaction to the point system in general. Issues of fairness and privacy of point systems seem to dominate the concerns of our membership. Any use of Body Mass Index (BMI) as a criterion for premiums and/or points seems to elicit a very vocal perception of the lack of scientific support for BMI as an indicator of anything worthwhile. Mandatory generic prescriptions appear to be a “hot button” issue as well.
The response to Question 5 (choice between two and four tier systems) should be interpreted carefully. The rate increases/decreases included in that question were estimated on policy data available at that time. If that increase/decrease data changes substantially, it is possible that the yes/no response ratio could change significantly, perhaps actually reversing!
We hope you find this data illuminating. And we certainly welcome any comments, suggestions or concerns regarding these important issues surrounding the future of our healthcare.
Question 1: Do you support an employee receiving points (toward his or her 8 points) for quitting smoking?
| Response |
Percentage |
n |
| Yes |
67.44% |
116 |
| No |
32.56% |
56 |
| Total |
100.00% |
172 |
Question 2: Do you support an employee receiving points (toward his or her 8 points) for lowering their BMI?
| Response |
Percentage |
n |
| Yes |
67.44% |
116 |
| No |
32.56% |
56 |
| Total |
100.00% |
172 |
Question 3: Do you support employees having to pay 30% of their medical premium if their BMI is in the obese range?
| Response |
Percentage |
n |
| Yes |
22.09% |
38 |
| No |
77.91% |
134 |
| Total |
100.00% |
172 |
Question 4: Do you support charging a spousal surcharge of anywhere from $50 - $150 per month to cover employees spouses if the spouse has access to healthcare through his or her employer?
| Response |
Percentage |
n |
| Yes |
34.12% |
58 |
| No |
65.88% |
112 |
| Total |
100.00% |
170 |
Question 5: Choose between the options below:
- Change to a 4 tiered premium
- Keep a 2 tiered premium system
| Response |
Percentage |
n |
| 4 tier (Yes) |
36.90% |
62 |
| 2 tier (No) |
63.10% |
106 |
| Total |
100.00% |
168 |
Question 6: Do you support mandatory generic prescriptions? Employees would have to get generic medications when available or pay the full price of brand name medication. An appeals process may be available.
| Response |
Percentage |
n |
| Yes |
43.35% |
75 |
| No |
56.65% |
98 |
| Total |
100.00% |
173 |
Question 7: Do you support creating a 30-45 day wait period for coverage of new hired employees?
| Response |
Percentage |
n |
| Yes |
20.71% |
35 |
| No |
79.29% |
134 |
| Total |
100.00% |
169 |
Know Your Contract
All faculty have the right to review their official personnel file kept with Human Resources. In addition, all faculty have the right to dispute the accuracy, relevance, timeliness or completeness of materials contained therein. If you feel that there are issues or concerns associated with your personnel file, please bring this to the attention of your CSEA Representative and/or the CSEA Executive Committee.
ARTICLE 16 – PERSONNEL FILES
Section 16.01 – Access
Each faculty member shall have the right to inspect the contents of his/her personnel file upon request. Faculty shall make an appointment during normal business hours, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. Access to review and copy the faculty member’s personnel file shall also be granted to the designated representative upon written authorization by the faculty member. Any person inspecting a faculty member’s file shall sign indicating he/she has reviewed the file.
Personnel files shall not be made available to anyone other than the College without the faculty member’s express written authorization unless pursuant to court order, subpoena or proper request made pursuant to the Ohio Public Records Act. All faculty personnel files shall be reviewed in the presence of a designated representative of the Human Resources Department.
Section 16.02 – Official File
There shall be only one official personnel file for each faculty member. The official file shall be maintained by the Human Resources Department. A copy of all documents relating to conduct, discipline or job performance shall be given to the faculty member at the time of their placement in the official file.
Section 16.03 – Review of Documents
A faculty member who wishes to dispute the accuracy, relevance, timeliness or completeness of materials contained in his/her personnel file may submit a memorandum to the Human Resources Department requesting that the documents in question be reviewed. The Department will review the matter and respond within fourteen days and immediately correct the file if necessary. If the faculty member disagrees with the Department’s determination, the faculty member may submit a written statement noting his/her objections to the material in question to be placed in the file within thirty days of notification of the document. Documents may only be reviewed or destroyed in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement or College Policy and Procedure.
CSEA Representatives
Executive Council - Officers
Executive Council - Senior Representatives
Department Representatives
The Word from CSEA is produced by the Communications Committee of the Columbus State Education Association – Judy Anderson, Darrell Minor, Eric Neubauer, Amy Ng, and Mark Polifroni. We welcome your comments, news, and insights. Please send all correspondences to Eric Neubauer at eneubaue@cscc.edu.