General Meeting Information

Date: February 16, 2021
Time: 4:00 - 5:00
Location: RSVP -

  • Agenda

    Time Topic Purpose Discussion Leader
    4:00 - 4:05 Approval of Notes – February 9, 2021 D/A Pape
    4:05 - 4:10 DASB Report I/D Dadbhawala/Eloy/Lim/Sharma
    4:10 - 5:00

    Qualitative Equity Focused Hiring

    • Introduction and Expected Outcome
    • Historical Context
    • Exploring Criteria

    IPBT Faculty Hiring page

    I/D Espinosa-Pieb, King, Pape

    A = Action D = Discussion I = Information





    Affinity Group


    Christina Espinosa-Pieb,


    Sam Bliss

    Randy Bryant

    Alicia Cortez

    Anita Muthyala-Kandula

    Lorrie Ranck

    Thomas Ray

    Heidi King – Co-Chair


      Thomas Bailey

      Christiana Kaleialii

      Lorna Maynard

    Mary Pape, Co-Chair


    Mayra Cruz

    DuJuan Green

    Salvador Guerrero

    Terrence Mullens

    Daniel Solomon

    Erik Woodbury


    Grace Lim

    Arushi Sharma

    Esha Dadbhawala

    Luiza Eloy


      Melinda Hughes

      Pauline Wethington


      Christine Chai

      Khoa Nguyen


      Eric Mendoza

      Felisa Vilaubi

  • Minutes [DRAFT]

    IPBT Meeting Notes - February 16, 2021

    Tri-chairs: Christina G. Espinosa-Pieb, Mary Pape, Heidi King

    Administrative reps: Sam Bliss, Randy Bryant, Alicia Cortez, Christina Espinosa-Pieb, Lorrie Ranck, Thomas Ray

    Classified reps: Thomas Bailey, Christiana Kaleialii, Heidi King, Lorna Maynard

    Faculty reps: Mayra Cruz, DuJuan Green, Salvador Guerrero, Terrence Mullens, Mary Pape, Daniel Solomon, Erik Woodbury

    Student reps: Esha Dadbhawala, Grace Lim, Arushi Sharma, Luiza Eloy

    Affinity Group Representatives:

    Black Faculty, Staff and Administrators (BFSA): Melinda Hughes, Pauline Wethington

    The Asian Pacific American Staff Association (APASA): Christine Chai, Khoa Nguyen

    De Anza Latinx Association (DALA): Eric Mendoza, Felisa Vilaubi

    Absent: Anita Muthyala-Kandula

    Guests: Karen Chow, Lisa Markus, Sarah Wallace, Vins Chacko, Rick Maynard, Daniel Smith, Susan Ho, Elvin Ramos, Kulwant Singh, Chesa Caparas, Dawn Lee Tu

    DASB Report: Grace Lim reported that DASB is still working on budget deliberations.

    Qualitative Equity Focused Hiring:

    • Introduction and Expected Outcome: Heidi King reminded us that we began the conversation last week of possibly splitting vacant positions into two categories:  one category would be evaluated using more of a traditional formula that has been used in the past and the other category being more equity focused would be evaluated using more qualitative criteria.
    • Historical Context: Mary Pape referred to the 2019-20 Hiring Data/Ranking spreadsheet containing the quantitative data such as enrollment, success rates, equity gap, and fill rates for the departments/programs requesting a new faculty member. This is the current process for prioritizing position requests. Mary pointed out that the sheet shows at a glance that some departments/programs do not have data for this type of comparison. Written Justifications is a document showing the department’s and program’s justification for hiring new faculty members and provides more qualitative data.

      Faculty hiring outcome for 2019-20 shows the ranking of 22 positions. The focus for today is on the 14 not chosen. Lorrie added context saying that we began with over 40 departmental requests to hire new faculty member. Alicia Cortez asked for clarity on what is meant by “new” and “replacement”. Christina assured that these terms would never be used again. Replacement is where the faculty member resigned or retired and De Anza retains the FTEF. Some of the requests are actually positions that are part of Service Employment Retirement and cannot be replaced for three years.
    • Exploring Criteria: Heidi suggested that there are three or four positions on the 2019-20 list that will never rise to the top using quantitative metrics. Today’s activity is directed at brainstorming equity-based position prioritization criteria that we can apply to evaluate these requests.

      Asked what our equity goals are, Christina answered that in this context the focus is on underrepresented student populations that are not reaching their academic goals. This differs from our previous way of focusing on student demand for classes.

      The goal is to come up with some equity base criteria, ideas and have a conversation of whether or not we want to make a commitment to some equity specific positions. The members brainstormed, explored criteria and shared ideas.

Documents and Links

Back to Top