Joint District Senate Meeting: 2:30-4:00
Location: Room 255, Media and Learning Center. De Anza College. 21250 Stevens Creek Blvd., Cupertino, CA 95014.
Administrative Business
Call to Order
Dolores Davison, District Senate President chaired the joint meeting.
Adoption of the Agenda
The Joint Academic Senate meeting began with the adoption of the agenda, which included three main items: updates to the strategic master plan, discussion of the J1B/J1C guidelines on RSI and Accessibility, and review of ASCCC spring plenary resolutions.
Adopted by consensus.
Public Comment on items not on agenda
None
New Business
District Strategic Master Plan
THIRD DRAFT - Updated Strategic Plan (April 1, 2026)
Presentation on Updated Strategic Plan (3rd Draft)
Gohar Momjian, Vice Chancellor for Strategy, Institutional Effectiveness, presented the updated District Strategic Master Plan, 2026-2030.
The plan included five breakthrough goals, five strategic priorities, and five foundational practices. See presentation for details.
Goal 1. Equity by Design
Target: By Fall 2027, redesign course scheduling to support workforce Pell Grant implementation to ensure 30% of eligible programs in accelerated pathways.
Goal 2. Learning, Innovation, and Liberal Arts Education
Target: Create five academic pathways for dual admissions articulation with UC/CSU transfer institutions by fall 2027.
Goal 3. Digital Transformation and AI Readiness
Target: by fall 2027, a framework for digital transformation is defined and applied to enhance the student experience.
Goal 4. Career Pathways and Economic Opportunities
Target: Ensure all CTE programs are aligned with labor market demand by the end of spring 2029.
Goal 5. Global Citizenship & Civic Innovation
Target: Every student enrolled in area 4 (CalGETC) will engage in civic and community engagement by fall 2030.
Gohar clarified that these goals are intended as breakthrough initiatives rather than district-wide requirements, with different colleges taking the lead on different areas.
Gohar outlined plans for quarterly progress updates and sought input from faculty and leadership on predictive activities and measurements.
The timeline includes a board review in May and potential adoption in June, with further refinements planned through the Chancellor's Advisory Council in April and May.
Comments
AI Integration in Strategic Planning
The discussion focused on integrating AI into the district strategic plan, with broader AI implementation beyond just tool usage to include critical thinking, ethics, and environmental impact.
Karen Chow emphasized the need for the district's commitment in faculty involvement in setting guardrails for AI use. It should be equity centered with professional development and adequate compensation for faculty training on AI.
Will the district include critical thinking on AI tools in Goal 3 (AI readiness), such as ethics issues, environmental pollution by AI data centers, equity gaps, etc.?
Gohar: The district will work with AI fellows and the technology advisory committee will work on this.
The group discussed concerns about CTE program outcomes and the importance of long-term monitoring of AI impacts on students and employment, with plans to incorporate CTE programs into the district strategic plan to address these changes proactively.
Lynnette Vega raised concerns about the growing older adult populations and suggested including lifelong learning in the plan. While the group agreed this was important, they decided to be cautious given current community funding uncertainties.
The joint Senates approved by consensus the proposed updates to the district strategic plan.
Next step.
Gohar will be presenting the updated district strategic plan to different constituency groups and district-wide governance committees,
Gohar will work with Academic Senate presidents and classified Senate presidents to identify and recruit appropriate members for the district strategic plan goal teams.
Gohar will present the district strategic plan to the Chancellor's Advisory Council in April and May for further input and refinements before board review in May and adoption in June.
Guidelines around RSI and Accessibility on J1B/J1C
J1B/J1C Accessibility and RSI Guidelines (Draft)
The representation focused on developing guidelines for evaluating digital accessibility in online and hybrid courses (J1B and J1C evaluations). The team discussed updating the wording of accessibility questions to emphasize shared responsibility between instructors and the institution, particularly regarding assistive technology needs.
The J1B/J1C guidelines addressed accessibility and regular substantive interaction requirements for online and hybrid courses. ADA compliance is a federally mandated requirement. Failure to follow the requirements, will result in penalties and legal consequences. Accessibility is a shared responsibility between colleges and instructors.
Faculty raising concerns about implementation challenges, particularly for specialized subjects like sciences and languages.
Key concerns were raised about the practical implementation of captioning requirements, especially for language courses and specialized subjects, with participants noting the significant manual effort required and the need for institutional support. The discussion highlighted the distinction between accessibility requirements (which are federally mandated) and accommodations, while emphasizing that these guidelines are intended to support learning conversations rather than create burdensome compliance requirement
Online Course Accessibility Requirements
The group discussed accessibility requirements for online course materials, including third-party software and publisher content. They acknowledged challenges in implementing these requirements due to resource constraints and legal complexities, particularly regarding copyright issues. The discussion highlighted the need for support for faculty navigating accessibility laws and emphasized that accessible materials benefit all students, not just those with disabilities. The proposal will move forward to negotiations with administration and faculty, with representatives from FA being informed of the resource needs.
Please see the details in the links.
The joint senates approved by consensus the guidelines around RSI and Accessibility on the J1B/J1C
Next Step.
FA Negotiating Team will negotiate and finalize the J1B/J1C evaluation guidelines, including accessibility and regular substantive interaction requirements, with the goal of having guidelines in place for fall evaluations.
FA Negotiating Team will ensure resource needs for faculty related to accessibility (e.g., support for captioning, third-party software, etc.) are raised during negotiations.
BREAK
ASCCC Spring Plenary Resolutions
Spring 2026 ASCCC Plenary Resolution
Joint Senate discussed and provided input on resolutions for the ASCCC Spring Plenary
The discussion focused on the upcoming ASCCC plenary, where Erik Woodbury, serving as second chair on the Resolutions Committee, explained the structure and process of state-level resolutions. He noted that 38 resolutions were being considered, organized into 14 different topic sections, with each resolution containing up to four "whereas" and "resolve" statements. Erik mentioned that resolutions are important for amplifying faculty voices at the state level, representing thousands of community college faculty across California.
Review of ASCCC plenary resolutions, included discussions about course time estimates and ethnic studies course prefixes,
101.01 regarding the protection of student course information and zero textbook cost policies. Mary Donahue raised questions about how many places zero textbook cost information is documented, and it was clarified that local Academic Senates would have decision-making power on implementing such policies
The discussion focused on the upcoming ASCCC plenary, where Erik Woodbury, serving as second chair on the Resolutions Committee, explained the structure and process of state-level resolutions. He noted that 38 resolutions were being considered, organized into 14 different topic sections, with each resolution containing up to four "whereas" and "resolve" statements. Erik mentioned that resolutions are important for amplifying faculty voices at the state level, representing thousands of community college faculty across California.
Review of ASCCC plenary resolutions, included discussions about course time estimates and ethnic studies course prefixes,
101.01 regarding the protection of student course information and zero textbook cost policies. Mary Donahue raised questions about where zero textbook cost information is documented, and it was clarified that local Academic Senates would have decision-making power on implementing such policies.
Student Time Commitment Resolution Debate
The resolution aims to specify expected time commitments for students outside of class. Participants debated the feasibility and accuracy of setting time estimates across different courses and instructors, with concerns raised about variability in student performance and understanding of course units.
The group also discussed resolution about course prefixes for ethnic studies requirements, with concerns raised about courses potentially being rejected due to incorrect prefixes. The delegates agreed to gather additional feedback from ethnic studies faculty and consider potential amendments to the resolution before the upcoming vote on Saturday.
Foothill/De Anza Delegates (Dolores Davison, Shagun Kaur, Erik Woodbury, and Voltaire Villanueva) will vote on these state-level resolutions at the upcoming ASCCC plenary session on Saturday
Reach out to Dolores, Shagun, Erik, or Voltaire ASAP so that they can address comments/questions/feedback.
Announcements
Updates were provided on two district-level initiatives:
developing a district-wide equivalency process for hiring
The formation of an Academic Freedom Group to review and adapt existing policies for both colleges. Academic Freedom group will begin with their first meeting this month,
.Dismissal
The joint meeting adjourned.