General Meeting Information

Date: February 4, 2026
Time: 2:30 PM - 3:30 PM
Location: ADMIN 109 / Zoom

Zoom Link (Guest Only): https://fhda-edu.zoom.us/j/81764947611?from=addon

  • Agenda

    Time Topic Purpose Discussion Leader
    2:30-2:35 Welcome and Brief Recap I/D All
    2:35-2:50 Constituent Feedback Updates and Report-Outs I/D All
    2:50-3:20 Continued Development of Draft Models I/D All
    3:20-3:30 Next Steps and Upcoming Milestones I/D All

    A = Action
    D = Discussion
    I = Information

  • Minutes

    The Task Force continued refining the draft time-block model and deepening constituent engagement. This meeting focused on reviewing feedback received to date, testing revisions to the emerging model, and identifying areas requiring further consultation before stabilization.
    Constituent Updates
    Student Athletes
    Feedback from student athletes was largely positive. Initial responses suggest only one or two teams’ practice times may be affected under the updated proposal, though this requires confirmation. Lab scheduling remains the primary concern, and alignment with athletics will continue to be reviewed to avoid unintended impacts.
     
    Academic Senate
    The draft model was presented to Academic Senate with an emphasis on the student-driven rationale behind the work. The Task Force clarified what “time blocks” mean, reinforced that drafts are evolving, and stressed the importance of ongoing feedback. The overall response was more supportive than anticipated.
     
    Key themes raised included:
    • Lab capacity: Three lab blocks per day were viewed as insufficient. There is concern that current lab courses, especially longer or back-to-back lab configurations, may require additional flexibility.
    • Math scheduling: Five-unit courses must continue to be offered in sufficient numbers. There can be no unintended reduction in access.
    • Classified staff voice: Input from lab technicians and other classified professionals is essential to understanding workload, room turnover, and operational impacts.
    • Exceptions: There was early discussion about potential exceptions; however, the group agreed that it is premature to define exceptions without first stabilizing a base model.
    Draft Model Discussion – Version 2
     
    A revised draft was reviewed exploring four lab blocks per day and integrated evening options. The group tested configurations for five-unit courses within this lab structure.
     
    Using Chemistry as a working example, the draft demonstrated potential for reducing student schedule conflicts between lecture and lab combinations. While not finalized, this modeling exercise suggests the possibility of improving pathway coherence without sacrificing instructional integrity.
    Friday and Saturday Options
     
    The group discussed interest in standalone Friday and/or Saturday offerings to support working adults and students seeking condensed schedules. Pedagogical concerns were raised regarding extended lecture blocks. Courses with hands-on, lab, or studio components may be better suited to these models.
     
    Hybrid configurations were briefly discussed. The group noted that very short Friday meetings would likely not sustain strong attendance.
    Next Steps
     
    • Share the revised Monday–Thursday draft model with constituent groups for feedback.
    • Present at Classified Senate on February 11.
    • Following the meeting, all four deans overseeing lab areas were contacted and provided the version 2 model, with a specific request to solicit direct feedback from lab technicians and other classified professionals.
    • Further explore standalone Friday/Saturday blocks with attention to working-adult needs.
    The Task Force remains focused on building a stable base model before determining potential exceptions or implementation timelines. Continued feedback will inform the next iteration of the draft.

Back to Top