CHAPARRAL

NO SHOW ROSTERS

When classes started September 5 and I didn't find my no-show/drop rosters attached to my temporary class rosters, my first reaction was that they must have been buried in the paper matter that grows aggressively on my desk.

But what I found out at the Academic Senate meeting on September 6 was that, in fact, there were no no-show/drop rosters.

At that meeting English Professor Mike Wheeler suggested that the vanished rosters created a possible legal problem in dealing with students on the wait list. What were teachers to do with wait-listed students if all the students at the top of the roster showed up, or even if they hadn't shown up but couldn't be marked as no-shows?

Wheeler contended that teachers were obligated to take those students since they had paid their fees. "We're contractually bound to keep them," a prospect that might force teachers to take students beyond their class limits, he said.

What no one at the meeting seemed sure of was just what you do to drop students without the drop/no-show roster. It may be a case of not really missing something until it’s gone, according to Sharon Combs, Dean of Admissions and Records.

"Only about 25 percent of faculty used them," she said. The rest have presumably reported drops on the no-show census roster which this semester came out a week earlier than previously, on September 17.

The earlier rosters were never anything more than a courtesy, Combs said. And since they weren't widely used, she chose to scuttle them. "We had such an overlap of paper that it was one of those things we could eliminate," she said. "We did this in the summer and there was no problem. But for the fall it seems to have caused a problem."

As for how to drop a student without the drop roster, Combs said, "The policy is that you can drop no-shows any time you want." In fact, the state education code mandates instructors to drop students who don't show up the first class, she said, hastening to add that the college catalog statement that students may be dropped only for failing to attend all class meetings during the first week is superseded by Title V of the state code.

In the future, instructors will be able to drop students through the computer, eliminating the need to provide hard copy lists, Combs said. Until that time arrives "There is no way to interact with the computer list, and there is no ability to indicate no-shows on the first day of class," said Michael Ritterbrown, an English instructor. "I think it causes havoc."

"It seems confusing," said Ritterbrown, who teaches creative writing and Scholars English classes that have lower student ceilings than many other classes. "If I have 27 students and five on the wait list, and I can't drop in the first week, I suddenly have 32 students. I have no way to tell a person they're not in my class."

Ritterbrown said that the no-show rosters should be distributed until instructors have the capability to drop students by computer.

Linda Serra, Chair of the Business Division, said that is particularly important in her division to be able to drop first-day no-shows because of the limited number of computers available for students. But she also said "with the national tragedy, we asked instructors to give students a little longer to adjust."

Serra agreed with Ritterbrown that under the current system, there should be no-show/drop lists, and they should be submitted by instructors after the first full week of classes.

"The no-show/drop list is a valuable tool if you have an over-enrolled class," said Jean Perry, Chair of Language Arts. "Now you have no way to report them." It is particularly confusing to both full-time and adjunct instructors because when A and R decided to eliminate the rosters "they didn't publicize it," Perry said.

"A and R made a mistake in not announcing it," agreed Steve White, chair of Social Sciences. But he added that he thinks it's better that the paperwork was eliminated. "You just have to warn people."

Instructors have every right to count a student as a no-show early on, then report them on the census roster, White said. But he also said that the timing of the no-show census roster was wrong and that it should reflect attendance records ending the second full week of classes, which was September 18 rather than September 17.

The no-show census roster, which was to be submitted by instructors by September 24, states that "you should drop students that you could not accommodate from your wait-list." But it also says that "if the student attended your class anytime during the first week, the student should not be dropped as a no-show."

This may clarify the instructors' commitment to students who were on the wait list, but could not be accommodated because the class was full, but the second statement further muddies the issue of reporting no-shows. In fact, it leaves one with the nagging question: Just what is a no-show?

That's where the confusion lies. The implication is that if a student doesn't show on day one, but makes an appearance on day two, then he or she can't be dropped or at any rate can't be counted as a no-show.

Combs said that she would attend a meeting with division chairs September 26 to discuss the no-show roster policy, and would comply with their wishes. She also said that there would be only one more term in which it would be an issue. Thereafter, attendance reporting would all be handled via computer.

When that process goes into effect, one could only hope that everyone--even the more computerly challenged among us--will be clearly instructed about how it works.