Final Results of Convention Motions Now Available

Thank you all for attending the convention, your participation is integral to conduct business of the DCCFA. The results of the vote are shown below.

Here is a PDF of the final certified results.

For an amendment to the constitution to pass, it must earn two-thirds vote of the membership in attendance provided the proposed amendment shall have been published in the official publication at least fourteen (14) days before the meeting (DCCFA Constitution, Article XIV, Section 1). A total of 269 people voted on the ballot and that is how we defined presence per vote of the Council prior to the convention. Therefore 180 yes votes (>2/3) are required for the motion to carry.

·       Consideration of Proposed Constitutional Amendment ONE: TO CHANGE THE NAME OF THE DCCFA; Offered by Jennifer Hudson Allen (BHC).  The vote was 259 yes votes, so the motion carries.

x

·       Consideration of Proposed Constitutional Amendment TWO: TO REWRITE THE DCCFA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE II; Offered by Jennifer Baggett, Lamrot Bekele, Carlette Patrice Lockett, Rolanda Randle and Mary Wood (RLC). The vote was 212 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed Constitutional Amendment THREE: TO REWRITE THE DCCFA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE IX; Offered by Jennifer Baggett, Lamrot Bekele, Carlette Patrice Lockett, Rolanda Randle and Mary Wood (RLC). The vote was 157 yes votes, so the motion fails.

·        Consideration of Proposed Constitutional Amendment FOUR: TO REWRITE THE DCCFA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLES VI AND XIV; Offered by Patrick Moore (RLC). The vote was 173 yes votes, so the motion fails.

For an amendment to the bylaws to pass, it must earn a majority vote of the members present at a general convention (DCCFA Bylaws, Article XII). A total of 269 people voted. Therefore 135 yes votes are required for the motion to carry.

·       Consideration of the Amended Version of Proposed ByLaws Amendment ONE: MEMBERSHIP IN THE DCCFA; Offered by Jennifer Hudson Allen (BHC). The vote was 165 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed ByLaws Amendment TWO: TO ALLOW VIRTUAL CONVENTION, ONLINE VOTING, AND PROXY REPRESENTATION; Offered by Matt Hinkley (EFC) and Wade Hyde (ECC). The vote was 181 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of the Amended Version of Proposed ByLaws Amendment THREE: TO UPDATE ARTICLE XIII TO ALLOW FOR PROXY VOTING IN GENERAL AND SPECIAL CONVENTION; Offered by Patrick Moore (RLC). The vote was 171 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed ByLaws Amendment FOUR: TO UPDATE ARTICLE I TO REFELCT THE TRADITIONAL PURPOSE; Offered by Jennifer Baggett, Lamrot Bekele, Carlette Patrice Lockett, Rolanda Randle and Mary Wood (RLC). The vote was 204 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed ByLaws Amendment FIVE: TO UPDATE ARTICLE IX TO ADD STANDING COMMITTEES FOR EACH ACADEMIC SCHOOL; Offered by Jennifer Baggett, Lamrot Bekele, Carlette Patrice Lockett, Rolanda Randle and Mary Wood (RLC). The vote was 167 yes votes, so the motion carries, but the constitutional amendment required for this bylaws change to be enacted failed, so the bylaws amendment is ruled out of order by the chair.

·       Consideration of Proposed ByLaws Amendment SIX: TO ALLOW FOR ACADEMIC SCHOOLS REPRESENTATIVE ELECTIONS; Offered by Jennifer Baggett, Lamrot Bekele, Carlette Patrice Lockett, Rolanda Randle and Mary Wood (RLC). The vote was 167 yes votes, so the motion carries, but the constitutional amendment required for this bylaws change to be enacted failed, so the bylaws amendment is ruled out of order by the chair.

·       Consideration of Proposed ByLaws Amendment SEVEN: TO UPDATE ARTICLE XII TO ALLOW BYLAWS CHANGES THROUGH SPECIAL CONVENTION; Offered by Patrick Moore (RLC). The vote was 187 yes votes, so the motion carries, but the constitutional amendment required for this bylaws change to be enacted failed, so the bylaws amendment is ruled out of order by the chair.

For a resolution to pass, it must earn a simple majority of the votes cast at a convention.

·       Consideration of Proposed Resolution TWO: TO ADOPT A DCCFA POSITION ON DALLAS COLLEGE SINGLE ACCREDITATION, DEI INITIATIVES, AND PROFESSIONAL ETHICS; TO ENDORSE THE AGB/ACE/AAUP JOINT STATEMENT ON SHARED GOVERNANCE AND THE AAUP POSITIONS ON ACADEMIC FREEDOM AND FACULTY ACADEMIC GOVERNANCE; AND TO APPROVE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF A GENUINE SHARED GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE AT DALLAS COLLEGE.; Offered by Paul Day (EFC).  A total of 239 people voted yes or no. Therefore 120 yes votes are required for the motion to carry. The vote was 138 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed Resolution FOUR: FACULTY PRIMACY OVER METHODS AND MANNER OF ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES ATTAINMENT AND TIMEFRAME FOR FINAL GRADE SUBMISSION; Offered by Paul Day (EFC). A total of 245 people voted yes or no. Therefore 123 yes votes are required for the motion to carry. The vote was 154 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed Resolution FIVE: ON DEFAULT TEXTBOOKS AND LEARNING MATERIALS; Offered by Paul Day (EFC). A total of 246 people voted yes or no. Therefore 124 yes votes are required for the motion to carry. The vote was 158 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed Resolution SIX: ON THE FREEDOM OF THE SYLLABUS; Offered by Josh Rose (BHC). A total of 244 people voted yes or no. Therefore 123 yes votes are required for the motion to carry. The vote was 169 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed Resolution SEVEN: TO ESTABLISH FREEDOM TO ADDRESS THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES; Offered by Paul Day (EFC). A total of 238 people voted yes or no. Therefore 120 yes votes are required for the motion to carry. The vote was 146 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of the Amended Version of Proposed Resolution NINE: ADDRESSING FACULTY COUNCIL MEETINGS WITH THE CHANCELLOR, VICE-CHANCELLORS, AND PROVOST; Offered by Daniel Murphy (EFC). A total of 250 people voted yes or no. Therefore 126 yes votes are required for the motion to carry. The vote was 162 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed Resolution TEN: TO REQUEST 360 DEGREE REVIEWS OF FACULTY SUPERVISORS; Offered by Daniel Murphy (EFC). A total of 249 people voted yes or no. Therefore 125 yes votes are required for the motion to carry. The vote was 202 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed Resolution the Amended Version of ELEVEN: TO END MARRIAGE DISCRIMINATION IN EMPLOYMENT AND SUPERVISION; Offered by Daniel Murphy (EFC). A total of 251 people voted yes or no. Therefore 126 yes votes are required for the motion to carry. The vote was 187 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed Resolution TWELVE: TO END NUMERICAL GRADING; Offered by Daniel Murphy (EFC). A total of 240 people voted yes or no. Therefore 121 yes votes are required for the motion to carry. The vote was 133 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed Resolution THIRTEEN: TO RECONFIRM THAT THE DCCFA IS THE REPRESNTATIVE OF DALLAS COLLEGE FACULTY; Offered by Patrick Moore (RLC). A total of 238 people voted yes or no. Therefore 120 yes votes are required for the motion to carry. The vote was 178 yes votes, so the motion carries.

·       Consideration of Proposed Resolution FOURTEEN: TO ADDRESS THE DISTRICT LEVEL STRUCTURE OF THE DCCFA; Offered by Jennifer Hudson Allen (BHC). A total of 250 people voted yes or no. Therefore 126 yes votes are required for the motion to carry. The vote was 185 yes votes, so the motion carries.

 NOTE: Matt Hinckley did not write text of this post; he only posted what was sent to him.

Faculty Council Update on Discussions with Provost Re: Mask Order, Master Course Table, Caps, Dual Credit, and Final Exam Schedule

Happy Friday, Faculty Association Members,

Today your DCCFA Council met with the Provost, Vice-Provosts, members of AST, the Critical Response Office (CRO) and Educational Partnerships (EP, which is dual credit). Below is a recap of what we discussed. Please reach out to us if you have follow-up concerns or questions. Additional context may also be found in this recap of the August 19 meeting between the same group of administrative leaders and the School reps. 

 

COVID/Masks 

• The Dallas College mask mandate is still currently in place, so plan to wear your masks and plan to remind students at the start of your classes that the mask mandate is in place. 

• 
  

• Dr. Floyd recommended opening class with something like, “Dallas College has a mask mandate for all employees and students that is intended to help us all feel safe and be safe as we learn and work together.”  

• 
  

• Chief Critical Response Officer Sharon Davis recommends focusing on de-escalating and positive reinforcement rather than singling out non-compliant students because of how politicized this situation has gotten. They want all students to feel safe and learn and do not want to put anyone at risk of a confrontation that could turn violent. So, they will be working on getting more information to us Monday. Still, in the meantime, they asked us to please refrain from demanding students wear a mask and be aware that the police cannot assist in this situation because they are not allowed to enforce a mask mandate with no legal consequences. You can record their name on your roster and submit these violations to the student code of conduct, found through the Office of Student Advocacy.  

• 
  

• Disposable masks will be provided on campuses, but Dr. Floyd said they may not be all in place by Monday. 

• 
  

• Syllabus: Dallas College will communicate the following language via eCampus for faculty to use in their syllabi: 

 

To align with County Judge Clay Jenkins’ Order of August 16, 2021, employees and students are required to wear masks while at Dallas College locations or events. The CDC recommendation applies to both fully-vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals as Dallas County is an area of high transmission of COVID-19. 

Master Course Table 

The master course table (MCT) has finally been posted! It is on the Faculty Load Portfolio (ACH) Share Point site that Dr. Morris included in his email this morning (August 20), which is also where the ACH calculator and definitions and ACH manual are available. If you did not attend one of the summer sessions, there is a recording of one of the sessions there, too. 

 

Schedule and Section Caps 

• This topic was a robust discussion about the importance of respecting faculty needs and pedagogical considerations before raising caps. 

• 
  

• Dr. Floyd particularly, but also several vice-provosts acknowledged that there were communication failures this summer as the schedule changed and caps changed without warning to faculty. Dr. Floyd stated that the chairs (or deans if there is not a chair yet) should obtain permission from the faculty for an overload and that the need for an overload should be discussed with the faculty. 

• 
  

• Dr. Floyd and several vice-provosts, particularly Dr. Walker, stressed that they would be working to improve these communication errors because deans and chairs should have been keeping faculty more informed. Dr. Walker stated he will have his chairs find out faculty preferences so that their process will go more smoothly in future semesters once they have that information in advance. Please note as an aside that we did not talk about whether deans or chairs were informed themselves, due to time and the focus on what faculty were not told in time, but the next bullet points address that. 

• 
  

• Dr. Floyd and several vice-provosts reiterated that the Vice-Provosts are responsible for ensuring their deans and chairs are sharing the information needed with faculty and to ensure faculty preferences are collected to get back the missing institutional knowledge. They stated that they will work to improve their communication and try to ensure they respect faculty preferences on cap raising in the future by collecting that information earlier and communicating more quickly when student enrollment indicates there is a need to raise caps or add sections.  To improve communication, they referred us to the new School Share Point sites that list all the leadership and titles so we can easily find who we should be talking to in our School. 

• 
  

• Dr. Floyd agreed that it is preferable to keep course caps at optimum and add sections when possible. This is another area they hope to improve as we learn more about the new system and enrollment management.  The Council suggested putting into place an automatic notification of changes as well so faculty are informed and can reach out themselves if their dean or chair misses it or is out of the office. Dr. Floyd made a note and will investigate it. 

• 
  

• The vice-provosts stated that if a dean/chair does NOT inform you of something, you should let the vice-provost know quickly by email because they are responsible for following up to find out where the communication failure occurred. For example, if you see a class which you were assigned has disappeared from the schedule and your dean/chair did not tell you about it the same day it happened, email this information to your vice-provost providing dates and times of the prior conversations about this assignment and when the course disappeared from the schedule. It could be an error, or it could be a failure to communicate – your vice provost should help with this. 

• 
  

• Dr. Floyd stated that if the vice-provost does not help with this in a timely manner, loop her into the situation by providing your last communication with or to the vice-provost so she can follow up. The DCCFA faculty recommendation is to please wait at least a business day before including the provost unless the situation is truly urgent. 

 

Educational Partnerships / Dual Credit 

• There were some classes with zero enrollment – those are being cancelled. They started two weeks ago, continued into this week, and were completed Friday morning, August 20. Your dean or chair should have notified you if a class was cancelled that you were scheduled to teach. If not, see the note above about letting your vice-provost know so they can close those communication gaps. 

 

Final Exam Schedule 

• This fall Dr. Morris stated, and Dr. Floyd concurred, that we will keep the normal weekly schedule of class meetings for finals week. This means that you can administer your final exam on either of your two class meeting days (Monday or Wednesday for MW classes or MWF classes, for example), but it needs to fit within the normally scheduled 80-minute class time.   

• 
  

• Contact hour requirements will be met by a single class meeting of 80 minutes during finals week, so there is no need to meet on both days. 

• 
  

• The DCCFA Council pointed out that students may end up overloaded with exams on the same day and offered to make recommendations for how to stagger the final exams to spread them out for students. Dr. Floyd and Dr. Morris gratefully accepted the Council’s offer to provide these recommendations, which we will get to all faculty by the end of next week so they can be added to your syllabi.  For now, please post syllabi with TBA on your final exam date/time and you can update the posted versions once we have these recommendations. 

All members of the Faculty Council contributed to this report.