Committee Meetings and Minutes

Administrative Login

eStaffing Committee

Meeting Minutes

Current Status of Minutes: Final
Date	February 22, 2016
Time	2:30 PM - 4:00 PM
Location	HBC 301.7

Members Present
David Albert, Donald Becker, Sue Bloodsworth, Andrew Christie, Mary Kohls, Joe Lostracco, Dianne Olla, Gaye Lynn Scott, Gillian Waterston
Guests Present
No guest attendance has been recorded.

Item # 1:	Review of December 14 eStaffing Committee meeting minutes.
Presenter	Andrew
Discussion	Approved. {DB; GLS} It was re-confirmed that eStaffing Committee is awaiting decision by AFA President as to whether to pursue past efforts to modernize MSTA and Senior categories. The Administrative Rules that guide eStaffing seem out-dated and are in need of college review. As long as ARs stay as they are, the treatment of MSTA and Senior categories within eStaffing will stay as they are.

Item # 2:	Review of Summer 2016 eStaffing.
Presenter	Committee
Discussion	Summer 2016 eStaffing is currently in Phase 2. So far, Summer 2016 eStaffing has gone very well. The nightly update of eStaffing from Colleague went very well and there have been no identified negative repercussions of that decision. During the first few hours of Day 1 of Faculty Preferences there was a bug that affected lecture/lab combinations. The bug was introduced as a result of a modification to the 90-minute location functionality. The bug was quickly identified, the software fix made, tested, and put into production, and there were no lasting negative consequences of the bug. A change in Colleague policy in which course sections were no longer to be deleted, but, instead, cancelled, led to the import of cancelled course sections into eStaffing. eStaffing has been modified to filter out cancelled course sections. The travel warning that advises against staffing course sections from different campus locations where the ending time of one is within 90 minutes of the starting time of another sections works well, given that the Department Chair can override the warning. However, to be consistent with standard designations, the warning symbol should be colored yellow rather than colored red. The request to change the warning color was approved by the eStaffing Committee as a result of this discussion.

Item # 3:	MSTA Categorizations & Review of MSTA 2016
Presenter	Committee
Discussion	MSTA Process appears to be going well, although only 10 departments have activated the switch allowing MSTA applications. It is known that one department not on the list is performing the MSTA process outside of the system. It is not known how they intend to award those who are selected. IT is in need of a decision as to how to treat the MSTA Term Type when a department makes a change. Thus, a discussion took place, leading to a consensus decision. The MSTA Limits screen is the screen used for Department Chairs and Deans to set the maximum number of MSTAs allowed in each department. To the right of that column is the indicator for MSTA Term Type. There are two MSTA Term Type options: 'Fall, Spring Only' (the default), and 'Fall, Spring, Summer'. A couple of departments switched from 'Fall, Spring, Summer' to 'Fall Spring Only' last Spring. The Dean has confirmed that this was accidental. What this meant though was that a few departments had MSTAs that were treated as only Adjunct for Summer 2016. The department wanted them to be considered MSTA for Summer 2016 because that was the traditional setting that had been used and is considered to be the desired option. What IT needs to know is how to treat MSTAs if, in the future, whether intentionally or not, a department changes the MSTA Term Type setting. If the MSTA Term Type changes for a department, should MSTAs, whether new, renewed, or roll-over all be treated with the new MSTA Term Type value? If so, this would make it easier to understand, track, and communicate. Or, should MSTAs, whether new, renewed, or roll-over be treated individually based on the setting that existed for the most recent MSTA approval? The reasoning for this option is that there could be an implied contractual agreement between the individual Adjunct and the department as to the length of the MSTA placement for any given academic year. Given that (a) changes by departments are expected to be rare, and (b) historical data linking Adjuncts to their MSTA term type by academic year exists within the eStaffing database, thereby making it easier for Administrators to make a wise decision if at any future point an MSTA were to challenge the change to the Term Type, the consensus decision was to treat the Term Type for all MSTAs within the department in the same way, that is, with the Term Type that was selected during the annual MSTA process.

Item # 4:	Miscellaneous
Presenter	Committee
Discussion	Andrew will forward the request from Sue for a Training environment for eStaffing. (Note: This request is trickier than thought at the time of the meeting. First, it would involve IT Systems in creating a 4th instance of eStaffing that would need to be updated and maintained along with the other 3 instances (Development, Test, and Production. Second, the setup necessary to support a specific training area would be more extensive than simply modifying the Test environment for training purposes. Third, although IT uses the Test environment as a means of researching problems that are reported as occurring in the Production environment, eStaffing training almost always occurs outside of actual eStaffing timeframes, and, thus, the Test environment could be used for the specific training events.) Andrew will the request for a Department Chair report, as requested by the eStaffing Committee in December. (Note: This was done shortly after the request was made, but the infrastructure it used was later needed to help support the new Guided Pathways model. In the case of GP, SCHOOLS were used to support Areas of Study, and DIVISIONS were used to support Academic Programs in the 3-tiered Areas of Study/Programs/Awards heirarchy. Thus, IT will re-work the model that would support Deans and Department Chairs to maximize reporting efficiency.) Andrew will create the Summer 2016 Compliance Report at the conclusion of Summer 2016 eStaffing, and have the report distributed appropriately. (Note: the Compliance Report will be based on the data within the eStaffing database and will not be factoring in any physical obstacles or mental conceptualizing that may have led to a department not being in compliance with the ACC Administrative Rules governing Adjunct Staffing.) The AFA Representative made a request that the first email reminders that are sent to Adjunct Faculty indicating that there were course section assignments that need to be accepted or declined, be changed from Day 2 (i.e., 2 days prior to the actual start of the Acceptance period) to Day 0 (i.e., the first day of the Acceptance period.) The AFA representative made an enhancement request for a new type of course section preference; one related to length of course section. This is an enhancement request that would take some analysis to determine whether number of weeks, or start/end date range would work better. One of the committee members remembers a time when eStaffing did have a date range preference function. The reasoning behind the request is that it would be a user-friendly way of helping the instructor filter out course sections that might interfere with scheduled vacations or other events that might interfere with their teaching. The committee consensus was to accept this as a possible future enhancement.

Austin Community College
5930 Middle Fiskville Rd.
Austin, Texas 78752-4390
512.223.4ACC (4222)