ACADEMIC SENATE MEETING

MINUTES

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 2008

SEVEN HILLS CONFERENCE CENTER, NOB HILL ROOM

2:00 – 5:00 p.m.

	ATTENDANCE:
	Avani, Nathan	Hellman, David	Noble, Nancy
	Behrooz, Maziar	Holzman, Barbara	Rehling, Lu
	Boyle, Andrea	Hom, Marlon	Rosegard, Erik
	Bugayong, Arlene	Jin, Leigh	Rothman, Barry
	Burke, Adam	Kohn, Jim	Salama, Mohammad
	Chelberg, Gene	Landry, Lynette	Sheldon, James
	Chen, Yu-Charn	LePage, Pamela	Sherwin, Paul
	Cheung, Yitwah	Levy, Eileen	Shrivastava, Vinay
	Chou, Fang-yu	Li, Wen-Chao	Sinha, Dipendra
	Corrigan, Robert	Luna, Debra	Sveinsdottir, Asta
	Danner, Don	Mahan, Dianne	Taylor, Don
	Dariotis, Wei Ming	McCarthy, Chris	Trautman, Ray
	DuVal, Derethia	McCracken, Bridget	Ulasewicz, Connie
	Flatt, Sylvia	Minami, Masahiko	van Dam, Mary Ann
	Gemello, John	Modirzadeh, Hafez	Whalen, Shawn
	Gomes, Ricardo	Moody, Laura	Wingard, Leah
	Gubeladze, Jospeh	Morishita, Leroy	Yee, Darlene
	Hellenga, Kate	Neely, Francis
Absences: Hussain, Mahmood (abs); Robertson, Bruce (exc); Kysh, Judy (abs); Bartscher, Patricia (exc); Shapiro, Jerald (exc);
Guests: Gail Evans, Gail Whitaker, Helen Goldsmith, Nancy Hayes, Linda Buckley, Oswaldo Garcia, Wanda Lee, Bernard Bowler

CALL TO ORDER: 2:12 p.m.

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

1. Nominations are being solicited for the Administrative Search Committee Pool, as described by policy #S08-180. The deadline is Wednesday, September 17, 2008. Following the deadline, the Academic Senate will conduct an approval vote of the faculty who have been nominated. All nominees receiving at least 50% plus one of the votes cast will be elected to the Pool.

2. The new Policy on Timely Adoption of Textbooks for Students, #S08-249, is being implemented this semester. October 1, 2008, is the deadline for textbook adoptions for Spring 2009. This deadline provides the Disability Programs and Resource Center with sufficient time to convert textbooks, course readers and electronic reserve materials to accessible formats as needed by students with disabilities.

3. The 2009 SF State Faculty and Staff Development Retreat will be held on Thursday, January 22, 2009, at the Downtown Center. The theme for the retreat is “Sustaining Excellent in the 21st Century: Building and Refining Proud Traditions.”

4. Bernard Bowler, Commissioner of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC), was introduced to the Senate. Mr. Bowler joined WASC’s Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities in 2005 as one of its public members, following a career as an executive at IBM for more than thirty years. He continues his life long commitment to education by bringing his financial expertise to several boards and charities.

5. The 2008-2009 Executive Committee was introduced to the Senate: Andrea Boyle, member of the Academic Senate CSU; Wei Ming Dariotis, chair of the Academic Policies Committee; Eileen Levy, chair of the Faculty Affairs Committee; Bridget McCracken, chair of the Student Affairs Committee; Lu Rehling, member at large; Barry Rothman, chair of the Strategic Issues Committee; Mohammad Salama, member at large; Vinay Shrivastava, chair of the Curriculum Review and Approval Committee; Jerald Shapiro, member of the Academic Senate CSU; Dipendra Sinha, Vice-Chair; Ray Trautman, Secretary; Shawn Whalen, Chair; and Darlene Yee-Melichar, member of the Academic Senate CSU.

6. Eugene Chelberg, Associate Vice President for Student Affairs and Director of the Disability Programs & Resource Center, has agreed to serve as parliamentarian of the Senate. The Parliamentarian shall attend Senate meetings to advise the Chair on procedural matters.

AGENDA ITEM #1—Approval of the Agenda for September 9, 2008

The agenda was approved by unanimous voice vote.

AGENDA ITEM #2—Approval of the Minutes for the May 13, 2008 Meeting of the 2008-2009 Senate.

The minutes were approved by unanimous voice vote.

AGENDA ITEM #3— Academic Senate Procedures Orientation

Chair Whalen provided an overview of Senate procedures, including the following items:

• Although most Senate meetings will be called for 2 p.m. to 4 p.m., Senators should keep the hours of 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. available for meetings, as it may become necessary to schedule some meetings past 4 p.m.
• A majority of the authorized membership (60 to 65 total members) must be present to constitute a quorum. A quorum must be present at all times in order for the Academic Senate to conduct business. Senators are requested to arrive promptly at 2 p.m. and remain in attendance until adjournment.
• Voting on substantive motions (i.e., those involving university policy, those in which the Senate takes a position on an issue, and the like) takes place in two stages: first reading and second reading. This procedure is described in the Senate’s bylaws; it is not part of Robert’s Rules of Order.
• During the first reading a motion is still the property of the originating committee or other mover. Changes can be made, without the cumbersome process of amendments, etc. The first reading is thus more like a discussion than the deliberative process defined by Robert’s Rules of Order. The Chair will rarely rule any discussion out of order during first reading; broad discussion is both appropriate and encouraged. Amendments are not appropriate during first reading. It should be the rare occasion for a motion to be moved from first to second reading at one meeting, with the exception of motions from CRAC, when there is no indication that amendments will be proposed and invited guests are present; when external deadlines require quick action; and symbolic motions.
• Once an item is in second reading, it becomes the property of the Senate. Changes can be made only by amendment. “Friendly amendments” are improper. Whenever possible, amendments should be prepared in advance of the meeting, and handouts for Senators distributed at the meeting.
• Because motions become the Senate’s property, it is necessary to strike a balance between the Senate’s desire to “trust” the originating committee’s formulation and its responsibility to approve, amend or reject motions as it deems appropriate.
• All documents distributed in hard copy to Senators before meetings are available on the Senate’s web site.

AGENDA ITEM #4— Academic Senate Elections

Senators Danner, Hellenga, Ulasewicz, and Van Dam were nominated for the 2008-2009 Senate Elections Committee. Senator Danner withdrew his nomination. Senators Hellenga, Ulasewicz, and Van Dam were appointed by acclamation.

Sudip Chattopadhyay, Associate Professor, Economics; Harvey (Skip) Davis, Assistant Professor, Nursing; and Genie Stowers, Professor and Chair, Public Administration, were nominated for the University Budget Committee, to fill one 1-year and two 3-year terms. A motion to close nominations passed by unanimous voice vote. Professors Chattopadhyay, Davis, and Stowers were then appointed by acclamation.

AGENDA ITEM #5— Presentation on Western Association of Schools and Colleges Accreditation Review (WASC), AVP of Academic Planning and Educational Effectiveness, Linda Buckley—report to be heard no later than 2:45 p.m.

Dr. Buckley reported to the Senate on San Francisco State University’s WASC Institutional Proposal; a copy of the proposal was included as an attachment to the Senate’s agenda. Following her report, Dr. Buckley responded to questions raised by several Senators.

AGENDA ITEM #6— Recommendation from the Executive Committee: Proposed Resolution in Support of the WASC Proposal, First Reading

Senator Yee-Melichar, on behalf of the Executive Committee, moved that the Senate adopt the Resolution in Support of San Francisco State University’s Proposal to the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. Senator Yee-Melichar then described the resolution and the Executive Committee’s reasons for supporting the resolution. Senator Rehling moved the item to second reading. The motion to move to second reading was approved by unanimous voice vote. The motion to adopt the resolution was then approved by unanimous voice vote.

AGENDA ITEM#7—Recommendation from the Academic Policies Committee: Proposed Resolution on Suspension of General Education Curriculum Revisions, First Reading

Senator Dariotis, on behalf of the Academic Policies Committee, moved that the Senate adopt the Resolution on Suspension of General Education Curriculum Revisions. Discussion of this item included the following:

• The resolution needs to include a definition of “complete proposals.”
• The General Education Council wants more than “an idea”; they want completed proposals that do not need to be returned for any revisions.
• Proposals that were returned by the General Education Council last semester will be entertained, if they are submitted by October 15.
• The General Education Council will define “complete proposal”.

The speakers list was exhausted. The Chair urged Senators to bring issues related to the resolution to APC’s attention before their next meeting on September 16. The motion will return to the Senate in second reading on September 23.

AGENDA ITEM#8—Recommendation from the Academic Policies Committee: Proposed Revision to the Repeat of Courses Policy, First Reading

Senator Dariotis, on behalf of the Academic Policies Committee, moved that the Senate adopt the Revision to the Repeat of Courses Policy. Encouraged by the Chair’s solicitation of a broader discussion than the one policy revision proposed by APC, the discussion of this item included the following:

• SF State’s policy can be more restrictive than the CSU Executive Order on course repeats, but not less restrictive. The policy passed in Spring 2008, #S08-248, needs one revision, to come into compliance with a revised Executive Order.
• When will the restrictions on repeating a course begin? How will students, staff, and faculty be informed of the policy? What is the timeline to inform students when policies are approved, and what is the timeline to implement policies? (Answer: Normally, policy changes are implemented in the following academic year. There are ways other than bulletin statements to inform students.)
• Can department chairs and college deans grant exceptions, as allowed in the policy, which would be in conflict with the Executive Order’s restrictions?
• The exception clause in #S08-248 is greatly appreciated.
• How does the grade cut-off for repeating a course apply to graduate students, given the different grading policy for graduate students?
• How does a student’s bulletin year influence the interpretation of this policy? (Answer: “Bulletin rights” are historically tied to graduation requirements, not to policies.)
• How are CR/NC grades interpreted in the grade cut-off for repeating a course?

The speakers list was exhausted. The Chair urged Senators to bring issues related to the course repeat policy to APC’s attention before their next meeting on September 16. The motion will return to the Senate in second reading on September 23.

AGENDA ITEM#9—Recommendation from the Executive Committee: Proposed 2008- 2009 Standing Committee Assignments, First Reading

Senator Boyle, on behalf of the Executive Committee, moved that the Senate approve the 2008-2009 Standing Committee Assignments. Several Senators noted that their unit identifications were incorrect. All Senators were encouraged to send typographical and identification changes to the Secretary. Senator Behrooz moved the item to second reading. The motion to move to second reading was approved by unanimous voice vote. The motion to adopt the standing committee assignments was then approved by unanimous voice vote.

Chair Whalen declared the meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m.