Dying Kelly Thomas Initially Ignored By Fullerton Paramedics Because of Police Request (NavelGazing)
The SOUTH ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT — "[The] blog he developed was something that made the district better." - Tim Jemal, SOCCCD BoT President, 7/24/23
Monday, May 7, 2012
Board self-evaluation: relatively low self-scoring re "ethics"
We recently reported that the SOCCCD Board of Trustees were about to meet to “evaluate” themselves as trustees and as a board. We snidely suggested that they would give themselves an “A.”
Well, today, Chancellor Poertner directed the district community to the results of the trustees’ self-evaluation. And we weren’t too far off the mark.
Strongly agree — agree — neutral — disagree — strongly disagree
The evaluation comes in two parts. Part I concerns 56 statements—positive ones such as "trustees are knowledgeable"—that the trustees rated from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree.” Of the 56 statements, only 7 record any disagreement (i.e., “disagree” or “strongly disagree”). That is, in 49 of the 56 statements, trustees scored only "strongly agree," "agree," or "neutral." In the case of most statements, all or most marks were for "strongly agree" or "agree."
Natch.
Excellent — good — neutral — fair — poor
Part II concerns 8 goals, and the trustees rated themselves from “excellent” to “poor” relative to those goals. (Evidently, trustees, unlike students, can’t fail.)
Of the 8 goals, no trustee gave the board a “fair” or “poor,” although, in the case of 7 goals, some “neutral” votes were recorded.
Evidently, all seven trustees filled out the evaluation, since 7 votes are recorded. (I’m assuming that the student trustee was not asked to fill out the evaluation form.)
Here are some noteworthy cases:
The relatively disagreeable:
Again, the trustees tended to give themselves high marks, but there were some exceptions to the rule of unanimous or near-unanimous self-congratulation:
Statement 3: the board spends adequate time discussing the future needs and directions of the district.
Strongly agree – 2Statement 16: the board periodically reviews the chancellor’s contract to assure appropriate support and compensation.
Agree – 2
Neutral – 2 (29%)
Disagree – 1 (14%)
Strongly disagree – 0
Strongly agree – 1Statement 40: the board expresses its authority only as a unit.
Agree – 3
Neutral – 3 (43%)
Disagree – 0
Strongly disagree – 0
Strongly agree – 1Statement 42: the board regularly reviews its code of ethics or standards of practice and has a policy on addressing violations of the code.
Agree – 3
Neutral – 1 (14%)
Disagree – 2 (29%)
Strongly disagree – 0
Strongly agree – 2Statement 43: board members uphold and comply with the board’s code of ethics.
Agree – 3
Neutral – 1 (14%)
Disagree – 1 (14%)
Strongly disagree – 0
Strongly agree – 1Statement 49: board meetings and study sessions provide sufficient opportunity to explore key issues.
Agree – 3
Neutral – 3 (43%)
Disagree – 0
Strongly disagree – 0
Strongly agree – 1Goals:
Agree – 3
Neutral – 2 (29%)
Disagree – 1 (14%)
Strongly disagree – 0
The trustees generally gave themselves high marks relative to “goals” also. No trustee selected “fair” or “poor” re goals. The worst marks were “neutral.”
Three goals received 2 neutral votes:
Goal 2: in addition to reviewing and adopting an updated code of ethics policy, the board will discuss and renew commitment to communication protocols and expectations for trustee roles during board meetings and with college staff and communityUnsurprisingly, the board gave its highest score to statement 33: the board maintains an adequate financial reserve
Goal 5: the board is committed to listening to and considering faculty, staff, and student perspectives and recommendations in local decision-making. It is committed to clarifying its rationale for decisions that may be counter to those recommendations.
Goal 6: the board will seek opportunities to inform administrators, faculty and staff about board roles, limits, responsibilities, accountability to the community, and rationale for decision-making.
Strongly agree – 5 (71%)Later, if I have time, I'll present the results of the employees' survey
Agree – 2 (29%)
Neutral – 0
Disagree – 0
Strongly disagree – 0
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Roy's obituary in LA Times and Register: "we were lucky to have you while we did"
This ran in the Sunday December 24, 2023 edition of the Los Angeles Times and the Orange County Register : July 14, 1955 - November 20, 2...
-
Professor Olga Perez Stable Cox OCC Trumpsters/GOP A professor called Trump’s election an ‘act of terrorism.’ Then she became the vict...
-
The "prayer" suit: ..... AS WE REPORTED two days ago , on Tuesday, Judge R. Gary Klausner denied Westphal, et alia ’s motion f...
-
Yesterday morning, the Irvine Valley College community received an email from college President, Glenn Roquemore, announcing the coll...