[Note: see Master Plan COMMENTS.]
The Master Plan.
Rebel Girl will resist the urge to take apart the roots of that phrase, the implications of "master" (think "slave" not to mention self-abuse, onanism). --After all, she's been out of grad school for years. Has she got your attention now? Good.
Her point today is a brief one and has to do with the link marked "Master Plan" on the IVC website.
She and her colleagues have clicked and clicked that link in recent weeks. They've been trying to join a "participatory process that includes the shared vision of hundreds of students, faculty, staff, administrators, trustees and members of the community."
Why? Well, take a look at where they teach -- scattered about campus in an incoherent constellation of classrooms and offices that confuses even seasoned faculty, full and part time, let alone students.
So, they want to help designing that "thoughtfully prepared roadmap to be known as the 2011 Education and Facilities Master Plan which ultimately guides the development of instructional programs, student services and facilities."
Besides, Rebel Girl and her colleagues have been encouraged to do so by the powers that be through the usual flurry of emails.
Oddly, their comments -- as submitted -- have yet to appear on the site. The only recent comments posted have to do with broken links -- and, oddly enough, missing recent comments.
A robust series of comments would, of course, foster more discussion, exchange of ideas, etc.
It could be that Rebel Girl and her colleagues submitted questions and comments that were laced with profanity and therefore deemed unprintable! It could be that their questions were difficult to address, so difficult that they won't be posted or addressed until after the process is over. That happens sometimes. You know how it goes.
It could be that this public airing of concern might inspire some movement somewhere. After all, it's a new day. A new flag is flying.
The final meeting with gkkworks is next week.
 |
| The once and future "Humanities Building" |
18 comments:
Magic!
All the grumpy, profanity-laden comments have just been posted!
OMG!
Granted despite their promise of weeks ago that the comments were NOT being posted until answers could be composed - the newly posted comments all have the same reply:
"Thank you for your comment, we will reply soon."
Good work Dissent the Blog!
Now, go get those "replies"!
A new flag, supressed comments now posted - what's next?
Digs for part-timers where they could actually meet with their students? I hope so.
This is the "response" we've been waiting weeks for:
"Thank you for your comment, we will reply soon."
I guess I don't understand why it took so long to post the comments/questions/concerns if posting was delayed so that the comments/questions/concerns could be addressed - and now this - a non-answer to very good comments/questions/concerns.
Overheard in A-200 just before the last gkk meeting:
A trio of well-suited people with a large portfolio seeming to laugh and complain about the recent flurry of comments and questions about the process.
At least that how it seemed to me.
They could just be blowing off steam. You know, crazy faculty with their crazy questions mucking things up.
I know it took a long time but at least the comments are now posted. I am sure it was just a computer glitch.
Someone tell me why new buildings are built without classrooms. Please. And why the BSTIC building doesn't really house the shrinking business school (won't all teh fulltiemrs be gone when this year is out?) Who plans this stuff?
Don't you know that it is simply the illusion of an open process? You're not actually SUPPOSED to comment! Or ask QUESTIONS! When you do, they complain about it, you betcha. Or ignore it.
Notice how there are no answers to the questions people posted - queries that were, despite the occasional wordiness, thoughtful and rooted in the day-to-day experiences of students, staff and faculty.
I thought they were paid to address these issues. Maybe they are just being paid to do what a few people whisper to them to do - like most everything else here.
They'll reply to your concerns only AFTER their decisions have been made.
That is what kind of "open transparent process" it is.
Your questions only interfered with it - don't you know that? You were supposed to be too busy or too distracted to participate. Don't you have a new accreditation report to write? One that says that everything is hunky dory?
It's true. They advertise an "open" process (only because they must) and then they complain when people participate.
More importantly though, your "participation" underscores that there is actually no room in the process for such input - the deal has already gone down.
That is how we ended up with buildings built without classroom facilities (!) and buildings built to house shrinking programs (BSTIC!) and the increasingly Frankensteinish A-quad - a monument to an profound inability to envision (isn't that a gkk-word we paid thousands for?) anything...
I hope the trustees are paying attention to this. Before they approve the new plan, they should ask for a comprehensive tour of the IVC campus as it is - not be shown the fancy plans of what a few want it to be. They should visit us in our ratholes of offices and see where we teach. They should pretend to be a new student and sit awhile in a chair in our classrooms - try A-201B or one in teh B-100 building. They should try and find department offices (Where's ESL? Where's Spanish? Where's English?) or play try to find the dean.
I just read the comments posted about the Master Plan.
I don't know why gkk hasn't been able to muster answers to at least some of the questions posed. Their inability to address these pretty basic concerns makes me question what criteria they have been using to design our future.
Isn't this what we are paying them to do? How much are we paying them by the way? Have they ahd other jobs with the district?
I was at a meeting earlier this week where a faculty member talked about serving on two previous master plan committees and how after the first building was built - the rest of the plans were abandoned.
How much $$$ do we waste on this kind of stuff? Let alone of the hours of labor. Whee is the oversight?
I do believe that gkk has received numerous contracts with the district (e.g., out at ATEP). Maybe it's time DtB looks into that situation.
I agree that the board should come see the current state of IVC before it is sold the new plans.
The trustees are so seldom on campus except for big events - and then they are shown to the best facilities not the worst.
Let's show them the worst and see if the new plans are addressing this situation.
While your nudge dislodged the hidden IVC comments yesterday - there haven't been any new comments posted by Saddleback since December!
I posted something today @ 9:00am. It's now 4:20pm. and it still ain't up there yet. Quite inefficient, I must say.
Feb 11 again. I just checked the website and they still haven’t posted my concerns and question. I thought these things were supposed to be instantaneous, being advanced technology and all… Does this process include screening our concerns and questions? Looks that way to me, so I’ll go ahead and post here what I attempted to post there:
“Point of information:
The four A-Quad buildings along with B-100 are not permanent structures; they are temporary-modular buildings with brick facades. These kinds of buildings are not meant to be remodeled, but rather disassembled by section (like they were assembled) and hauled-off on 18 wheel tractor-trailer rigs. Think “double-wide mobile homes.”
Q1:
Doesn’t the Master Plan call for permanent structures?”
The last gkk meeting is today and no further comments have been posted - nor have any "replies" or "answers" been posted to the series of long-withheld comments that "suddenly" appeared last week.
The fix is in.
Clearly, they never expected actual participation. They created an illusion of an open process - hence the laughing complaints about our behavior overheard in A-200.
They don't care - as long as they get paid their world keeps turning. Besides, this is how it always works.
(I like the new info about the A-quad mentioned above. That explains everything including the rats in the ceilings.)
Does seem like the fix is in. I predict that they'll claim we didn't participate soon enough. If they say anything at all.
You're right - the process looks open until you participate - then the process disappears comepletely. Like something out of Alice in Wonderland.
Feb 11 here again,
How interesting that Mr. Felder’s comment from 2/14 got posted but mine from 2/11 did not. I believe this proves the whole process was selective and not really “open.” Another tip-off is the inconsistent chronology of all the posts. We’ve been ripped-off! What a TOTAL JOKE!
“Date/Time: 2011-02-14 18:23:40
Who: Faculty
Location: IVC
Name: Steve Felder
Comment: In the minutes from the December 15th SPOBDC meeting we read: "It was noted that historical data…”
Post a Comment