1st EPPC March Minutes
Academic Senate(530) 898-6201, Zip 02
Present: Way (Chair), Lillibridge, Huyck, Brady (Ford), Challinger, Loker, Selvester, Schindler (Cross), Nichols, Crotts, Allen, Boyd, Nice, Matray, Wolf, Avazino, Rowberg, Dizard, Long, Andetti Not present: None.
Guests: David Brown, Rebecca Damazo, Dr. Aschenbrener
Meeting was called to order at 2:30p.
1. Minutes of February 17, 2011 approved.
2. Approve March 3, 2011 Agenda – Agenda approved with change of item # 7 moved up to item # 4.
3. Announcements: Wednesday, March 9, 2011 from 7-10pm there will be presentations on science and religion in the Performing Arts Center. Phase Forward, the student production, is currently being presented in Harlan Adams Theater until Sunday, March 6, 2011. There is also a reception on Sunday. The sub-committee on pedagogy and technology has been formed. Lillibridge will be chair. Committee members include Loker, Selvester, Baumgartner and Nice.
4.Discontinue Option in Environmental Chemistry – Introduction ItemDr. Brown discussed that there is a lack of student interest and a lack of faculty advising. There are currently only three students in this option and so it is requested that this option be discontinued. Approved unanimously. Dr. Crotts moved to suspend the rules and move this item to an action item. Seconded and approved.
Action item – no discussion – Approved unanimously to discontinue this option.
5.New Master’s in Agricultural Education – Introduction Item
Changes were made to the original document so this item must be presented again as an Introduction item. There is only one master’s option in the CSU system. San Luis Obispo has a face-to-face degree so this new degree is the only online degree available. There are other similar degrees in other colleges. The nature of the consortium is new to the CSU system so it is critical to show our connection to the national group. It is expected that the program will be observed by others in the CSUs. The tuition is the same no matter what school a student is enrolled in - $465/unit – but not all institutions agree and have added tuition.
Motion was made and seconded to approve this new program as an introduction item. Approved unanimously.
Motion was made and seconded to suspend the rules since the mistake was technical. Approved unanimously.
Motion was made and seconded to approve this new program as an action item. Approved unanimously.
6.Computer Science BMS – Introduction Item
This proposal is for a blended or accelerated 5-year BS+MS program formed from two existing programs, the BS in Computer Science and the MS in Computer Science. According to a decision at the Chancellor’s Office, blended programs of this sort should not be considered new programs and do not need to be sent to the Chancellor’s Office for approval. Question on how a student can opt out of courses. Explanation is on page 5. Question about how interest there is for this program. 25 students were surveyed and visited in classes. 30% of the population are interested. It was suggested that this data be added to the proposal. CSCI 399 on page is listed as a special problems course. Why not change the title? Course currently exists and is a one on one class to connect a student to a faculty mentor. Question – eligibility mean – age + number of units and is described in the catalog. Question on page 4 – what is a “short” paper? A summary of research is attached to the application. It was advised to word in this manner. On page 6 G2 under culminating activity – What does “plan” mean? Students can decide which method they wish to pursue and is language used in the catalog. If a student goes through the accelerated program, he/she must complete 18 units There is the old language related to the diversity courses. It was suggested to change to “Global Cultures” and ‘US Diversity.”
Motion was made and seconded to approve this program as an introduction item. Approved unanimously.
7. Rural Northern California Clinical Simulation Center – Introduction Item
Ms. Damazo gave the background on the Sim Center, which was begun in 2006 as a partnership with Enloe MedicalCenter. She discussed how healthcare has between 50-100,000 deaths per year due to medical errors, which is the 8th leading cause of death. Therefore training healthcare professionals in simulation can help lower those numbers. The cost of the simulation manikins dropped in 2006 which is when the beginning of a public outcry occurred to lower the death rates due to errors. The Sim Center is unique in that is has a partnership now with Enloe and Feather River Hospital. Most simulation centers are housed in medical schools. The center recently received international accreditation as only 1 of 7 accredited centers in the world. The University highly suggested that the Sim Center propose to become an accepted University Center so that it will remain identified with the University and not the medical centers. The lab is located in the old Community Hospital and occurs 3800 sq ft. It was recently moved to another area and underwent extensive renovations. It now includes an OR, 3 patient rooms, OB, neonatal ICU and 2 conference rooms. Many health facilities run their staff through simulation for disaster training. Questions – why not a center sooner? The center was originally a pilot project through EDD in partnership with Enloe. Due to the success of the hospital embracing this idea and student need as well as the center not being fully staffed, it was suggested by the Dean of NS three years ago to become a University center. It was noted by K. Kaiser that she has seen the center on 2 different situations and was very impressed. There was a question about only having funding through 6/2011. The issue is money. It is expensive to run the center but it has been successful through grants for equipment but struggles with staffing costs. Income is from fees charged to the facilities using the center. The space is donated each year and amounts to about $85,000. Additional funding comes from student fees of $15,000 from the College of NS for the School of Nursing use. There was a $15,000 donation from Soroptimists. $20,000 came through workshop fees. Feather River Hospital gave $10,000 as a cash match and had 10 visits to the center in 2010. It is expected the FRH will exceed its expected budget by May 2011 so will pay additional fees for its use. The College of NS buys out 3 units of Damazo’s teaching time. There are two pending grant applications in the amount of $700,000 from NIH and HRSA. In the past the workforce Development department, EDD, has given $700,000 and has indicated that it will continue to support the center. The concern is whether the state budget will impact those funds. There is an act pending before Congress which stipulates the need for medical simulation. There was discussion about the salaries listed on page 9. They seem low. Damazo stated that they have a nurse educator for 10 hours per week and 28 hours per week are for the technician. Damazo stated that she works through breaks and that currently an additional 6 units of her salary is bought out by grants. There is no paid medical consultant. The employer is the University Research Foundation. Are the results attainable and is there an established long term impact? Damazo responded yes. It was suggested that the funding be added to the proposal. The governing body for the center is the Advisory Board which consists of representatives from most facilities that use the center. There is concern that the need will continue to grow and the center is currently completely booked through May 2011. There was a question on sustainability and concern that Damazo is working through breaks, etc. Damazo further discussed that they plan to obtain certification through the Board of Anesthesia as anesthesiologists must participate in simulation for their certification. This will add some additional funding. The center is also working with St. Elizabeth’s and Oroville Hospitals to bring their staff to the center. Butte County has provided $10,000. These issues are true for most simulation centers. It was stated that it was an awkward situation with the College of NS currently in the middle of a dean’s search so Dean Owens and School of Nursing Director Huston were not available for the meeting. It was suggested the University must commit to the continuation of the center. It was mentioned that Provost Flake is in support of the center. The service area for the center is to all of the north state. There was a concern about long term funding when the grants dry up.
Suggestions were made for areas of improvement in the proposal. It was suggested that eh projected funding be added and comments about healthcare reform. It was further suggested that the center should have full time grant writers. It was mentioned that current revenue and plans for the future should be provided with a defined business plan. The University should also have a plan for the center. It was also discussed that the salaries need to cover the actual work being done.
Motion was made and seconded that the Rural Northern California Simulation Center proposal be accepted as an introduction item. Approved unanimously.
8. Other – The next meeting is March 24, 2011. This is the last meeting where new items can be introduced.
9. Adjourn: The meeting was adjourned at 3:50p.
Respectfully submitted,
Peggy Rowberg