Minutes of the Academic Senate Meeting

of September 24, 2002

The Academic Senate was called to order by Chair Robert Cherny at 2:10 p.m.

Senate Members Present: 

Avila, Guadalupe

Bartscher, Patricia

Bernstein, Marian

Blando, John

Blomberg, Judith

Carrington, Christopher

Chen, Yu-Charn

Cherny, Robert

Collier, James

Consoli, Andres

Corrigan, Robert A.

Daniels, Robert

Edwards, James

Fielden, Ned

Fung, Robert

Garcia, Oswaldo

Garcia, Velia

Gemello, John

Gerson, Deborah

Gill, Sam

Gonzales, Dan

Gregory, Jan

Houlberg, Rick

Jerris, Scott

Johnson-Brennan, Karen

Klironomos, Martha

Luft, Sandra

McKeon, Midori

Meredith, David

Morishita, Leroy

Nichols, Amy

Noble, Wade

Pong, Wen Shen

Raggio, Marcia

Smith, Brett

Smith, Miriam

Steier, Saul

Stowers, Genie

Strong, Rob

Su, Yuli

Turitz, Mitch

Vaughn, Pamela

Warren, Penelope

Weinstraub, Aram

Whalen, Maureen

Williams, Robert

Yip, Yewmun

Senate Members Absent:  Aaron, Eunice (exc), Colvin, Caran (exc), Terrell, Dawn, Kassiola, Joel (exc), Strong, Rob (exc), Newt-Scott, Ronda (abs)

Guests:  Paul Sherwin, Sheldon Axler, Gerald Platt, Gail Whitaker, Gilda Bloom, Dan Buttlaire, Jerry Combs, Helen Goldsmith, Lavonne Jacobsen, Bruce Macher, Deborah Masters, Eloise McQuown, Val Sakovich, Catherine Powell, Jaih McReynolds, Georgianna Wong, & Marilyn Verhey
Announcements

Senator Mitch Turitz announced that George Diehr, faculty candidate for the CalPERS Board will be at the University Club, Verducci Room 4-5 p.m., October 1. Professor Diehr will answer questions and refreshments will be served. All faculty are invited to attend

Senator Rick Houlberg invited all faculty and staff with “talent of any kind” to participate in the “Cabaret Night” at the University’s Asilomar retreat. He and Jim Bebee are organizing this special cabaret night and are asking all interested faculty and staff to present their talent. Contact Rick at houlberg@sfsu.edu or Jim Bebee at jbebee@sfsu.edu

Chair’s Report

The senate chair did not give a report in order for the senate to have more time for debate.

Agenda Item #1 – Approval of the Agenda for September 24, 2002

m/s/p (Carrington, Turitz) to approve the agenda

Agenda Item #2 – Approval of Minutes for September 10, 2002

m/s/p (Turitz, Houlberg) to approve the minutes as amended

Agenda Item # 3 – Introduction of New College Deans

Dean Sheldon Axler, College of Science & Engineering stressed an active faculty engaged in teaching, research, and service, especially research programs that provide hands-on student activities. The largest challenge that the college must face is the development of external resources to support our continuing need for equipment and space. The college will continue to increase efforts to be more competitive in attracting faculty especially in the areas of start-up funds that are competitive with other universities.

Dean Gerald Platt, College of Business emphasized a closer working relationship between faculty and college administrators and working toward the integration of curriculum across departments and colleges. Dean Platt noted that he began his career at SFSU in 1976 as a lecturer and looks forward to working with the very talented existing and new faculty in the college. He noted that the college would continue to play a strong roll in both the academic community as well as in the San Francisco business community.

Dean Paul Sherwin, College of Humanities stressed several issues including strengthening GE Segment II & III courses; external funding, and integration of the Humanities with campus partnerships. The dean noted the impressive quality of the humanities faculty and the need to reduce teaching loads to attract the best new faculty. The Dean indicated that he would be working very aggressively at securing external funds for new programs, new journals, and new opportunities for faculty.

Associate Vice President Gail Whitaker noted that she had taken on the additional role as head of the College of Extended Learning. In this regard she would no longer have the responsible for campus program review as this task has fallen to AVP Richard Giardina. She stressed the role of the college in extending the mission of the university to the community coupled with the ability to generate funding for campus colleges and departments. She also indicated that CEL would be focusing on the academic quality of its programs and guarding against turning curriculum into a purely business adventure. The college would be looking to work with other colleges for opportunities to collaborate on courses offering and curriculum development.

Agenda Item #4 – Report from Statewide Senators

Senate Chair Robert Cherny recognized the three statewide senators: Jan Gregory, Eunice Aaron, and Robert Cherny (himself). He emphasize that the three statewide senators are elected by the SFSU senate and report back to the senate on CSU Senate activities.

Senator Cherny noted his e-mail report and emphasized the need for all departments that have teacher education single subject waiver programs to consult the changes in the statewide standards. A copy of the following report from the meeting of the Academic Senate CSU, Friday, September 13, 2002, was provided to all senators via e-mail:

The statewide academic senate meeting was called to order at 8:45 a.m.  The roll call concluded with Len Mathy, the new senator representing emeritus/a faculty; Mathy was the first chair of the Academic Senate CSU in 1963-64. Lynne Cook, chair of TEKR, announced that faculty on each campus should participate in an online survey on new teacher preparation standards. Chancellor Reed:  CSU still does not know the details of what is in the budget that the governor signed, because the legislature passed a lot of "trailer bills" that change what was in the budget that was approved by the senate.  Some of these trailer bills are themselves in conflict.  One trailer bill cuts $750 million from "governmental operations"; governor has until December to do this.  CSU qualifies as part of this, but some major parts of the budget are excluded (e.g., debt service payments, transfer payments to school districts).  Once one excludes those parts of the budget and prisons, CSU and UC are the largest remaining components. This could be as much as 5%.  Governor's office and Department of Finance won't say what to expect.  One possibility would be for DOF to put a series of cuts into a bill to go before a special session of the legislature, after the election.  One rumor is that the legislature may approve a vehicle fee increase once the election is past, and this would cover the full $750 million.  Term limits has affected the legislature to the point where virtually no one has any significant experience in the assembly; no one on the budget committee or in the speaker's office had any previous experience in passing a budget!  Reapportionment has compounded the problem, as nearly all-Democratic seats are safe, and nearly all Republican seats are safe, so there's no reason for anyone to be amenable to compromise on anything.

Rumors:  Salary increase would be rolled back.  Reed:  "We will meet every part of that contract that we ratified."

Budget includes 5% increase for enrollment, but we have about a 7% increase in enrollment.  CSU will have more than 400,000 students this fall.  CSU needs to give more consideration to some of the enrollment management tools that have not yet been used.  Only SLO and San Diego have real experience with impaction as a tool for managing enrollment.  Given the calendar, we need to make decisions on next year's admission in the next 6-7 weeks.  Spring transfer applications are also way up.  Reed would like to use careful enrollment management to have a net increase of 3% next year, to recoup the 2% that we are over this year.  3% is less than half of the increase we experienced this year.  However, legislature and Governor are very sensitive to issues of access.  Reed:  if they want us to accept the students, the legislator/governor needs to pay for them.  In addition to access, "we also have to preserve quality."  Regarding capacity, "we're flying the airplane and fixing the engine at the same time."  Summer is a one-time way to increase capacity a little.  It may be necessary to require students to take some number of units during the summer. 2003-04 budget:  We don't know the base at this time; so building a budget is a difficult exercise.  CSU will ask for 5% enrollment increase although we'll try to keep the increase to only 3%.  CSU will ask funding for mandatory costs (compensation, health benefits, etc.).  The cost of health benefits is "out of control" and eating up other parts of the budget; health costs are as high as 25-28%.   All this is over $297 million. Other requests:  $70 million on compensation increases, ACR 73 funding ($36 million), off-campus centers ($2.25 million), and high-cost academic programs ($8 million).

Reed complimented the senate on its role in the ACR 73 taskforce.  CSU will do 1200 tt searches this year.  Last year the CSU did 1100 searches, with about 75-78% success.  Implementing the recommendations of the ACR 73 taskforce will require $36 million up front and about $10 million per year thereafter.  CSU needs to compete nationally in hiring, and needs to improve SFR.  CSU will have to do about 1800 searches to meet the ACR 73 goals.  It is do-able. Academic technology issues:  The infrastructure will be there in a few years.  16 campuses will be implementing the new CMS programs for finance. Fewer will be implementing the new student and HR systems.  CSU needs to encourage more smart classrooms on campuses and more online courses.  CSU will try to highlight best practices. It may be possible to squeeze out 5% more capacity.  Only 0.5% of classes are taught online. Q:  where are your priorities if the budget is cut?  A:  depends on where the cuts come.  Access is a high priority. Q:  why not expand study abroad programs dramatically as a way to increase capacity? Q:  how will Master Plan affect us?  A:  probably not a major impact

BOT Chair Farar: Thanked senate for its fine work--reports, resolutions, letters, etc.  Polite nagging is a successful way to get things done.  ACR 73 an important success for the CSU.  Need to get out the vote on Prop 47. Re facilitating graduation:  Trustee Achtenburg says that we have too many coming in and not enough going out.  We need to work on this.  Committed to shared governance--a necessity.  Need to work together--need to approach legislators together.  Trustees should not be micromanaging, need to keep focused on meeting the needs of students.  Pledged, "always to listen." Q:  priorities as chair?  A:  Access, but access with quality.  However, quality without access is meaningless.  We should not exclude anyone from access to a quality liberal arts education.  Trustees and faculty are more alike than we realize. Q: reference facilitating graduation?  A:  need to focus on number of units rather than time to degree, because many CSU students are part-time, working students, etc.  UC has an additional charge for going over some number of total units. Q:  urge members of BOT to visit campuses, either with the Faculty Trustee or by themselves.   A:  campus visits are part of a trustee's job.  She comes when she is invited.

In response to a question about toleration and civility, Farar mentioned that she had attended a meeting at the Simon Weisenthal Center on campus issues, and that the SFSU handling of May 7 was generally understood as an appropriate and proper response but the Regents' response to an issue at UCB was more criticized.

Action items:

1. Modifications of the 2000 CSU Enrollment Management Policy, AS-2580-02/AA, first reading/waiver.   What is at issue in this resolution is a pending change in BOT policy on enrollment management, to come before the BOT next week.  The major changes in BOT policy include an increased emphasis on campuses' local region, the need to publicize each campus's enrollment target ten months prior to the beginning of each academic year, the situation of students applying to particular programs (impacted programs or programs that do not exist at the student's local campus), the definition of local region, and the creation of a new body on each campus (the presidential advisory group), and requirements regarding notification of supplemental admission criteria.  In some major part, these changes will have the most effect at those campuses that are most seriously impacted and that have formally declared impaction.  However, there is a requirement for every campus to have the presidential advisory group, in part due to legislative pressures to guarantee admission to eligible local students.  The resolution affirms the role of faculty in developing campus admissions policies.  We'll have copies of this resolution, the BOT resolution, and previous ASCSU resolutions on related issues.

The waiver was moved, seconded, and passed.  There was extensive discussion and a number of amendments.  Finally a substitute motion was drafted, moved and seconded.  The original motion was perfected.  The substitute motion was then perfected.  The motion to substitute was approved, so the substitute became the main motion.  The motion passed.

2. Support for Proposition 47, AS-2581-02/FGA, first reading/ waiver. Proposition 47, the Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Act of 2002, allows issuance of $13.05 billion in general obligation bonds for construction and renovation of educational facilities across the state.  The proposition would provide $496 million to the CSU.  The resolution is to support the measure.  There was discussion and some clarifying amendments.  The waiver was moved, seconded, and approved.  The resolution was approved unanimously.

3. Modification of Upper-division Admission Requirements, AS-2582-02/AA, first reading.   The resolution would require that a community-college student complete 60 transferable semester units to establish eligibility for admission as an upper-division transfer student, instead of the current 56-unit maximum.  There was discussion of the measure.  It will return for a second reading in November.

4. Amendment to Bylaw 2a, AS-2583-02/floor, first reading.  The motion, co-sponsored by 37 senators, proposes a change in the senate's bylaws that would specify that no officer of the senate serve more than two consecutive terms in the same office.  It would not limit service on the executive committee in a different office, nor would it prevent a senator from seeking the same officer after a break in service.  The wording of the bylaw was introduced and will be voted on at the next senate meeting. There was some discussion.  One senator suggested an amendment to strike the "grandfather" clause, and others suggested clarifying language.

5. Including Unit 3 Employees in the Program to Pay for Parking with Pre-tax Dollars, AS-2584-02/FA, first reading/ waiver. Moved and seconded. Waiver moved, seconded, approved.  Approved unanimously.

Senator Gregory emphasized in her report from the statewide academic senate’s Faculty Affairs Committee the important issues of: protection of campus “whistle blowers”; faculty role in curriculum development; hate crimes versus free speech; and the recommendation for funding of faculty parking fees. A copy of the following report from the meeting of the faculty affairs committee was provided to all senators. At its first meeting of this academic year, FAC/ASCSU held preliminary discussion of several matters:

1) Protection for individuals on the campuses who "blow the whistle" on wrongdoing of another or others, an item brought to FAC by Christine Helwick (office of General Counsel, CSU).  The broader issue is due process for all concerned in such cases.  In October, FAC plans to discuss the distinction between cases in which the behavior in question is Democratic on starkly illegal as against those which may fall into the category of professional misconduct.  It is now seeking policy documents or guidelines, if any, from the campuses to serve as background for the upcoming discussion.

2) Affirmation of the traditional role of faculty in development and housing of curricula.  On several campuses faculty in colleges of business and science as well others have been dealing with the possibility of inappropriate intervention of outside entities in the creation and development of new programs or additions to existing programs.

3) Possible access to and disclosure of electronic and other forms of communication on the campuses -- in other words, privacy of communication.  Again, FAC will be seeking information from the campuses to guide its discussion.

4) Hate crimes and free speech, and the role of the Academic Senate (if any) in acting on this matter.

5) The issues of roles and rewards for faculty participation in teacher education.  Brought to FAC by TEKR, this item has implications for the criteria for RTP on each campus.  It is expected that TEKR will take the lead on this item at the outset.

6) Impromptu audits of some departments in which faculty were given no opportunity to read and correct possible errors of fact on draft reports.  As reported, this issue may be a matter of faculty members' rebuttal rights when an audit is performed in such a way as to make anonymous allegations that create what faculty believe to be misperceptions about them.

7) An unexpected action item that took the form of a resolution that passed unanimously in the plenary.  The resolution urges CSU and CFA to bargain for collection of parking fees from PRE-tax dollars, its rationale noting that Unit 3 faculty are the only CSU employees who pay for parking from net income.

In addition, the committee had a lengthy discussion with CFA President Susan Meisenhelder about various matters including dissatisfaction about the chancellor's framing of compensation in the 2003-04 budget request; remaining difficulties in implementation of the 'new' contract; and hopes for the success in getting the legislature to fund first steps in response to the report on ACR 73 (increasing the number of tenure-track faculty in CSU without negatively affecting existing lecturer positions).

Agenda Item #5 – Report from Vice-President Leroy Morishita on the University Budget and from Vice President John Gemello on Academic Affairs budget planning.

VP Morishita outlined the University Budget process and the plans for a possible December 1% to 5% cut in 2002-2003 funding. A three page detailed report covering the San Francisco State University General Fund and Indirect Cost, “Working Draft”, budget proposal for fiscal year 2002 and 2003 was provided for all senators.  VP Gemello presented Academic Affairs planning to protect and maintain the spring semester instructional programs from the possible budget cuts. Gemello passed out to all senate members a copy of his presentation that covered Academic Affairs possible budget reduction planning. He emphasized that the priority is to protect the classroom. He indicated that no one is looking forward to the reduction that may come after the November election. Senator Williams indicated his concerns that faculty/student mentor, Ethnic Studies Access and Retention, and teacher diversity programs might be targeted for 27 to 33% cuts. VP Gemello indicated that these programs are very valuable activities for the university, that the proposed budget reduction plan is being developed to protect the classroom. Senator Jerris asked about the implication for budget planning of the present and future increase in enrollment demand brought about the “title wave II” students reaching college age. VP Gemello agreed that a restriction in income from the state would create problems for the university to meet enrollment demands. However, he indicated that the university does not control student fees and our income is set by the state legislature. President Corrigan also addressed the enrollment growth problems in relation to a lack of a related increase in state support. He outlined that for the last 16 years that there has not been much of an education policy in the state. We know we are going to have more students now and in the future. VP Morishita indicated that the campus is actively engaged with the CSU to get more money to support our increased enrollments.

Agenda Item #6 – Report from University Librarian Deborah Masters on Planning for the Library Construction

University Librarian Deborah Masters outlined in an extensive PowerPoint presentation, the fall 2004 to winter 2007 construction and renovation plans for the library. A copy of her report was provided to all senators. Her complete report is available on line at the University Library web site. She also indicated that all faculty, staff and student are invited to participate in the any of six planning meetings scheduled for October 7-18, contact dmasters@sfsu.edu. Senator Consoli asked if the library planning had taken into consideration the expected enrollment growth for 2007. VP Morishita indicated that our FTE in 2007 would be at 20,000, which is within the library’s plan.  

Agenda Item #7 – Report from Professor Jerald Combs on Planning for the Year of Civil Discourse

Professor Combs indicated that as a faculty we could do something to raise the level of discussion so that it was civil and rationale. He indicated that anticipated international event looks like this is going to be a very difficulty year. There is a strong likelihood that we will be facing tension over international issues or facing an actual war. We want to maintain a rational and civil atmosphere on our campus during times of tension. We as a faculty must step up and make sure that stability can be maintained. Professor Combs outlined a series of on campus events and activities at the Asilomar conference, which will emphasis free speech in relation to hate speech. All faculty are invited to play lead roles as models of civil discourse and free speech. Announced that renowned free speech expert Robert O’Neil will be featured at a presentation and panel discussion on October 17th, 2-4, Nob Hill room in the Seven Hills Conference Center.

Agenda Item #8 – Recommendation from the Faculty Affairs Committee: Approval of Changes in the policy for the Committee on the Protection of Human Subjects.

Senator Williams, acting for the chair of Facutly Affairs Caran Colvin, recommended the approval of changes in the policy for protection of human subjects

m/s (Wiliams, Turtiz) discussion 

Senator Houlberg recommended that senators vote against the proposed changes. He felt that there was a procedural conflict by placing committee oversights with both the Graduate Dean and the Vice President for Research and Grants. Bruce Marcher, Acting Director of ORSP, indicated that both the Dean and the VP deal with issues of human subject protocols. In the instance of the Graduate Dean almost 90% of all applicants are graduate students. Only 5% are faculty research projects.

Senator Vaughn indicated that the committee's overriding concern was the need to be in compliance with Federal protocols and Federal guidelines. Senator Wolfe asked about changes in language in the proposal. Senate Chair Cherny indicated that the language was there to clean up the original document. Gilda Bloom, Secondary Education and former chair of the Human Subject Committee, indicated that the Committee composition was guided by federal requirement and it does require that the assurance officer sit on the committee. Having the graduate dean on the committee is very important since so many or the applications are from graduate students. She also recommend that the seven member committee was too small and recommended that it be increased to 12. Senate Chair Cherny indicated that the Senate policy that created the committee indicates a minimum of 7 members.

The proposal will return to the senate in two weeks for a 2nd reading.

Agenda Item #9 – Recommendation from the Faculty Affairs Committee: Approval of changes in composition of hiring committees.

Senator Williams, acting for the chair of Faculty Affairs Caran Colvin, recommended the approval of the changes in the policy for the composition of hiring committees to include probationary faculty.

m/s (Williams, Steier) discussion 

Senator Houlberg indicated that he objected because the proposal does not require a department to provide rationale or reason why they are making a request to the president for a probationary faculty to be a member of the hiring committees. Senator Meredith indicated that it was his understanding that the President had approved probationary faculty as members of hiring committees so why do we need a policy to ask for their approval? Marilyn Verhey, Interim Dean of Faculty Affairs, indicated that the proposal was to bring the policy in compliance with the collective bargaining agreement. The agreement indicates that Department may request that probationary faculty be a part of the hiring committee. A request is not automatic. Senator Vaughn suggested that when the proposal returns to committee that the language would be cleaned up to separate the process and to deal with the rationale request. Senator Williams indicated that the proposal was developed to place the procedure for selection of the hiring committee at the department level, so that each department could make their determination on a rationale for including probationary faculty on hiring committees. Senator Stowers raised the concern that we might be making the process more complex for department and committees.

The proposal will return to the senate agenda in two weeks for a 2nd reading.

m/s/p (Steier, Meredith) to extend the agenda to 4:15 P.M.

Agenda Item #10 – Recommendation from the Student Affairs Committee: Approval of resolution on voter registration.

Senator Gerson, chair of Student Affairs Committee, asked that the Senate approve the resolution on voter registration.

m/s/p (Gerson, Garcia) unanimously

The Senate adjourned at 4:15 PM

Respectively Submitted

Jim Edwards

Secretary to the Faculty