4-5-05 iel task

IEL TASK FORCE NOTES 04/05/05

Present: Roxanne Beloit, Ellen Brown, Don Brunner, Toni Cummins, Karen Driscoll, Joe Dunlap, Marcus Jorgenson, Linda McDermott, Scott Morgan, Joanne Murcar, Linda Powell (recorder), Pam Praeger, Dixie Simmons, Colleen Straight, and Linda Uhden.

Guest: Dr. Gary Livingston.

The meeting came to order at 4:03 p.m. in the Falls Conference Room at SFCC. Dr. Gary Livingston was in attendance as the task force’s invited guest. Introductions were made.

IEL Report--Draft 7

Dr. Gary Livingston was invited to attend this meeting to discuss Draft 7 of the IEL Report.

Dr. Livingston thanked task force members for their time, efforts and hard work in drafting the IEL Report saying that he knew that this project would not be easy as much has evolved with the IEL over the last two decades. He stated that the district hopes to develop a plan for the IEL that meets the needs of today and the next five to ten years.

Dr. Livingston reported that the board began to question and seek out solutions to external and internal relational and funding issues. In 2004, the SFCC accreditation site visit brought issues and questions surrounding the IEL to the forefront. Relations and prior attempts for "college" status had to be clarified. In response, the Board asked: 1) What is the IEL; 2) What should it be; and 3) How should the IEL relate to the colleges, the district, and the state? The IEL Task Force was created in response to these concerns and questions.

Dr. Livingston stated that CCS collectively envisions change for the IEL. Many conversations have ensued regarding funding and relationships between the IEL and the colleges. In the 1990s and the early 2000s, various attempts for change were actively pursued and considered out of the necessity for equitable funding, such as an attempt for third college recognition. Dr. Livingston, Dr. Jim Perez and Scott Morgan have spent time meeting with SBCTC staff to work through issues such as funding, data reporting, etc.

Other issues pointed out in Dr. Livingston’s remarks included:

The IEL is interested in more recognition and autonomy.
SCC is interested in more formal relationship with the IE; SCC has broader offerings.
SFCC’s interest lies in accountability.
IEL provides literacy district-wide and instruction to outlying areas.
Develop more credit and outreach programs at the IEL.

Provides 8-10% credit instruction; 90% non-credit.

IEL is not being funded equitably "for the job they are doing."
Advantageous to the district as a whole to determine funding model.
Basic skills and literacy need to be funded at a higher level.
SBCTC has listened and has been responsive to our efforts to gain recognition for the IEL such as:

Biennial budget request of $500,000 for the transfer of Colville Center is included in both Governors budgets (Locke and Gregoire). Legislative decisions will influence outcomes.
IEL may apply independently for workforce and literacy grants; the state will accept up to three applications from CCS and the decision on which two district applications will be as a result of a competitive process.
SBCTC to work with the IEL to disaggregate IEL data reporting from SFCC data.

Dr. Livingston told the task force that he spent a good deal of time reviewing Draft 7 of the IEL Report and complimented the task force on a good report and indicated that the report provides the foundation for CCS to move forward. He commented that it was obvious to him that the task force spent much time on serious and difficult issues. He went on to say that the task force findings and recommendations provide a strong foundation that will allow CCS to set the stage to ask for support and external dollars from the state.

Dr. Livingston outlined the next steps for the IEL Task Force Report as follows:

Task Force to present the report to the Cabinet on April 26 at retreat.
Cabinet group will be given the opportunity to review and make recommended changes.
The institutions will have an opportunity to review report. The presidents and executive vice president will bring suggested recommendations back to Cabinet.
Chancellor will meet with the task force group presenting Cabinets recommendations.
Chancellor will consider final changes to the report and make his report to the Board.
Cabinet will continue to discuss recommendations and implement over time.

Dr. Livingston noted that he believes the IEL Report drafted by the IEL Task Force group will come back after going through review processes very similar to what the task force has presented to him today.

Scott explained to Dr. Livingston that the task force had issues that were discussed, but not resolved:

Affiliation – one college or two? SFCC has had a long relationship; SCC has an evolving relationship.

Dual affiliation with dual processes will create difficulties that may not be in the best interest of students.

Credit instruction issues – two solutions not pursued by the task force:

single district-wide accreditation; or
IEL out of credit instruction

Issues in Spokane County -- Mirabeau and Fairchild models.

Dr. Livingston recommended CCS develop a model for the IEL that has flexibility built in that is responsive to the communities they are serving, such as the current Colville model.

Business and Industry—CCS needs to decide where to put the "front door."

Dr. Livingston emphasized the importance for CCS to meet the needs of the business community. Higher education is becoming extremely competitive in Spokane County with Apollo and ITT marketing, recruiting and constructing buildings. Industry will decide the marketplace.

Scott Morgan asked the task force if they had questions to direct to Dr. Livingston. Don Brunner stated that the task force did a good job of raising issues, but felt that they weren’t able to come to resolution on some major issues.

Pam Praeger commented that the accreditation report shows that SFCC and the IEL have "pulled their act together" on tedious processes over time; however, credit instruction between SFCC and the IEL continues to be a sensitive issue.

A lengthy discussion ensued regarding accreditation processes, consistent administrative decisions, and common procedures.

Dr. Livingston commented that recommendations made in the report by the task force will help resolve issues that will need to be discussed and "hammered out." He went on to say that "the switch won’t get turned on and tomorrow the IEL will look different. Resolution will evolve in the next three to five years. Some things will happen quickly; difficult solutions will fall into place to create what we want the IEL to become. The outcome will depend on relationships and partnerships. There is more that we can do. Relationship changes will determine more than what we are today. We will have to do things differently."

Members of the task force requested that another meeting be scheduled to finalize Draft 7 and prepare for the task force’s presentation to the Cabinet prior to the retreat, which is scheduled for April 26, 1:30-4:30 p.m. at the SIRTI Building. The group agreed to meet next week.

Scott Morgan suggested that task force members review Draft 7 and if they have additions or revisions, to please forward recommended changes to all task force members for consideration prior to next week’s meeting.

The meeting adjourned at 5:18 p.m.

Next meeting: The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, April 12, at 2:30- 5:00 p.m in the Spokane Room at SFCC.