Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC)

Community College of Allegheny County

College Council Meeting Minutes March 11, 2010

March 11, 2010
Office Of College Services Board Room





Richard Allison
Maryann Anderson
Joyce Breckenridge
Yvonne Burns
Toni Carney
Mary Ellen Driver
Carl Francolino
Rita Gallegos
Donna Imhoff
Joanne Jeffcoat
Rachel Matheis
Maura Stevenson
Barbara Thompson
Stephen Wells 

Mary Frances Archey
John Dziak
Charles Martoni

Charles Bostaph

Maryann Anderson, College Council Chair, called the meeting to order at 2:31 PM.

FEB. 25, 2010 MEETING

Donna Imhoff moved to approve the minutes of the Feb. 25, 2010 meeting. Steve Wells seconded the motion.  The minutes were approved as amended with 12 votes in favor and one abstention.



Toni Carney reported that the two proposals being presented passed the Subcommittee unanimously. The Behavioral Intervention Team proposal failed to pass at the previous meeting, but only because there was a lack of information.

Proposal: Behavioral Intervention Team Language for the Student Handbook
Toni Carney explained that there was additional information presented by Dr. Donna Imhoff at the Subcommittee meeting that satisfied the members to pass this proposal unanimously. Donna Imhoff presented the proposal which would establish Behavioral Intervention Teams (BIT) on each campus to identify and monitor problematic or potentially dangerous behavior on the part of students. Its aim will be to ensure the safety and security of the college community.

Dr. Imhoff said that there have been many grievances filed over the years by the AFT regarding issues of security at the campus level. This proposal would allow for a central database in which staff and faculty on all campuses and centers can record atypical student behavior when it occurs on all campuses and centers.

The software that will be used is Maxient Conduct Software which is web-based. Anyone will be able to enter data; however, because of privacy issues few will be able to review the information. Teams on each campus will be established to monitor and deal with reported problems.

The proposal involves the insertion of the following language into the Student Handbook: “The college has an obligation to provide a safe and secure environment for the college community.  In meeting this commitment, the college has established Behavior Intervention Teams which respond to college situations involving dangerous, atypical, threatening or disruptive student behaviors. Behavior Intervention Teams assess situations in the college community, and intervene with regard to the health, safety, and security of the college community, and in accordance with college policies.”  

Dr. Imhoff distributed a threat assessment tool developed by Brett Sokolow who was the speaker at the College Professional Development Day meeting this past January. The College has retained his services as a consultant. His recommendation is to list in the Student Handbook that we are using Behavioral Intervention Teams on each campus.

The process, which is the same on each campus, involves the Behavior Intervention Team, led by the Dean of Student Development, that assesses situations and intervenes when appropriate; the Education Team, led by the Dean of Academic Affairs, whose role is to ensure that everybody knows about the process and how to use the software; and the Crisis Team, led by the Campus Director of Security, that puts together a process in the event of a critical incident.

Yvonne Burns expressed concern that the process does not follow through with referrals to external agencies such as Mercy Hospital Behavioral Health Services. Dr. Imhoff commented that the College is still in the process of setting everything up, and that piece has not been discussed.  

Rick Allison noted that there are teams being set up at the campuses, and different campuses are at different stages of development. Dr. Imhoff said that it is up to the Deans of Student Development to initiate the process at their campus, but we are at the beginning stages. She added that if anyone is not receiving information they should contact her.

Mary Ellen Driver commented that the Assessment Tool is excellent and should be distributed in its color-printed format.  Dr. Imhoff provided the link for the Assessment Tool which is located within the NaBITA 2009 Whitepaper: Threat Assessment in the Campus Setting, at Anyone can print the tool in color if they choose.

Toni Carney moved to accept the proposal, which includes only the language that will appear in the Student Handbook, and not on the concept of the Behavioral Intervention Teams. Joanne Jeffcoat seconded the motion and the motion passed unanimously.

Proposal: Bulletin Board Policy
The policy was presented by Dr. Charles Bostaph, the initiator of the proposal. Toni Carney explained that there are differing campus policies regarding the open bulletin boards that belong to Student Life. This proposal provides consistency among all of the campuses and protects the First Amendment rights of the campus community and the public. The policy ensures that discrimination regarding postings will not occur. Postings will no longer have to be stamped and may be placed by any member of the college community or by members of the public. Only postings that violate the student code of conduct, or are illegal or discriminatory, will not be allowed on the Student Life bulletin boards.

This proposal was the result of an attempt by Christa Brashier of Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, to post information regarding forming a student club on Allegheny Campus. When denied the right, Ms. Brashier threatened to sue the College. It was determined by our attorney that denying Ms. Brashier the right to post the information, violated her First Amendment rights. As a result, the proposal was put forth.

The proposal reads:”Designated Open Bulletin Boards are designed to provide information on events and items of interest to CCAC students. All bulletin boards may be cleared on the first day of each month.”

Carl Francolino moved to accept the proposal. Mary Ellen Driver seconded the motion, and the motion passed unanimously.

Toni Carney mentioned there is a proposal, which will be presented by Judy Savolskis, regarding the application of noncredit courses. This proposal was attempted last year and failed, however there is now a mandate from the State that will require acceptance of noncredit courses under some circumstances. The proposal is very controversial, and the interpretation of the mandate is being challenged.


Carl Francolino reported that the Subcommittee met March 4, at a meeting primarily devoted to assessment.

In her presentation, Mary Kate Quinlan reported that the assessment plans are going fairly well. Of the academic program assessments, 48% of the plans have been turned in.

Phase 2 of the Quantitative and Scientific Reasoning assessment will begin March 29. The goal is to have nine faculty members trained to evaluate classroom assessment and artifacts, and to conduct the evaluation over the Spring break.

A 90 minute webinar, on test question design and assessment followed the presentation; however, it proved to be disappointing.

Mr. Francolino said that he is trying to engage Dwight Bishop and Ibrahim Garbioglu in a discussion regarding library service and instant chatting. He would like to work with them and the Library Department Heads to see if this can be accomplished before the beginning of summer.

Mary Ellen Driver described the difficulty that occurs when a distance learning student is dropped from a course. Currently, when a faculty member deletes a student from a course after the student has been deregistered, all data concerning that student is lost. Deregistration sometimes happens by accident and causes problems when the student data disappears. Also, students can currently continue to access course material after they have been deregistered. Dwight Bishop reported that he can write a simple program so that the data can be archived. The program would automatically check for deregistered students, and then deny access to the course for that student.

Council members agreed that this program would be advantageous, but felt that this was not a matter for College Council. Rather, it is a procedure within Dr. Bishop’s department and can be handled there.


Maura Stevenson reported that the Subcommittee did not meet. Currently there are 11 proposals which will be presented at the next meeting. Maryann Anderson said that she is working with Dr. Stevenson to see if any of the proposals can be presented to College Council at a later meeting so that council members will have time to fully consider and discuss them. When the agenda includes too many proposals, there is not sufficient time for council members to devote the attention necessary for responsible consideration. Maryann Anderson mentioned that there are 2 meetings remaining for the Subcommittees and 4 meetings of College Council.


Joanne Jeffcoat reported that the Subcommittee did not meet. At the next meeting, there will be one program review, and Mary Kate Quinlan will be talking about the revised Appendix H.


There was no unfinished business.


Maryann Anderson said that Charles Blocksidge has requested to be put on the March 25 agenda to present the Hill Group Study completed by a consulting firm that considered our CCAC workforce development.

There being no further business, the meeting was concluded at 3:55 PM.


Respectfully submitted,
Barbara Thompson
College Council Secretary