Minutes of the Academic Senate Meeting of February 25, 1997

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

Senate Members Present: Sanjoy Banerjee, Paul Barnes, Patricia

Bartscher, Gerrie Baughman, Sally Berlowitz, Marian Bernstein, Janet Buchholz,

Yu-Charn Chen, Robert Cherny, James Collier, Jerry Duke, Gerald Eisman, Ken

Fehrman, Newman Fisher, Helen Gillotte, Helen Goldsmith, Peter Haikalis, Ann

Hallum, Jennifer Hammett, Caroline Harnly, Mary Ann Haw, David Hemphill, Marlon

Hom, Bonnie Homan, Rick Houlberg, Todd Imahori, Dane Johnson, Herb Kaplan, James

Kelley, Wanda Lee, Lois Lyles, Hollis Matson, Eunice McKinney-Aaron, Eugene

Michaels, Abdiel Oñate, Raymond Pestrong, Mark Phillips, Mario Rivas,

Roberto Rivera, Don Scoble, Peggy Smith, Lee Sprague, Dawn Terrell, Lana Thomson,

Thaddeus Usowicz, Marilyn Verhey, Patricia Wade, Mary Ann Warren, Nancy Wilkinson,

Alfred Wong, Yim Yu Wong, Darlene Yee.

Senate Members Absent: George Woo (exc.), Kenneth Walsh, Joel

Nicholson, Jay Schrock, Penelope Warren(exc.), Will Flowers, Gary Hammerstrom(exc.),

Thomas La Belle(exc.), Robert Corrigan(exc.).

Senate Interns Present: Jaymee Sagisi, Sabrina Mehrok.

Guests: E. Zwillinger, A. Hurley, P. Vaughn, N. Fielden, P.

Fonteyn, E. Seibel, G. Whitaker, T. Sampson, J. Kassiola, M. Mallare,V. Thompson,

K. Monteiro, T. Ehrlich, M. Kasdan, J. Randolph, P. Armstrong, E. Solomon, G.

West, B. Murphy, V. Casella, S. Shimanoff, M. Peña.

Announcements and Report

Chair's Report

Chair Phillips introduced Ray Pestrong/Geosciences as new Senator at-large.

Agenda Item #1 - Approval of Agenda for Meeting of February 25, 1997

As there were no objections, the agenda was approved as printed.

Agenda Item #2 - Approval of Minutes for Meeting of February 11, 1997

Usowicz requested that on page 3, paragraph 5, the 5th line be amended

to read "computer labs."

Cherny suggested that on page 2, Item #3 (LaBelle's report), since

the review of the Baccalaureate is still in progress, the minutes should reflect

that these items have been discussed, not completed. Cherny further

suggested that on page 2, Item #4, Vice Chancellor West stated his intention

to close all gaps. So he requested that the phrase "not salaries"

be omitted. The minutes were approved as amended.

Agenda Item #3 - Proposed Changes in MS Counseling: Concentration MFCC,

Masters of Science in Rehabilitation Counseling

CRAC Chair Ann Hallum introduced this item and introduced Gene Zwillinger

as a resource. This proposal is to strengthen the second year clinical sequence

by providing a greater opportunity for students to receive continued clinical

supervision throughout their course of study. The intent is to introduce a new

clinical course and adjust the units in the clinical sequence. There are no

resource implications from this proposal. It was M/S/P (Kaplan, Barnes) to

approve the item.

Agenda Item #4 - Proposed Changes in the School Counseling Specialization

CRAC Chair Ann Hallum introduced this item and introduced Audrey

Hurley who was present to answer any questions. This proposal is to strengthen

the core curriculum and to make the curriculum consistent with the professional

demands within the field and align it with the new competencies required for

school counselors. The changes consist of re-ordering the existing course requirements

and re-ordering the structure of how it is offered. There are no resource implications

from this proposal. As there was no debate in second reading, it was M/S/P

(Matson, Ferhman) to approve the item.

Agenda Item #5 - Proposed Policy on Undergraduate Instructional Aides

APC Chair Peggy Smith re-introduced this item still in first reading.

The committee incorporated some of the changes suggested in the previous senate

meeting, re-arranging the order to make it more consistent, and re-wording some

areas for clarification.

Smith emphasized several points in the policy. The faculty of record

must be present whenever the class is formally in session. While it may be unusual

to have an instructor also be a supervisor, it is not unique. Students need

to be aware of the normal grievance procedures to protect themselves if faculty

abuse this dual role. The issue of the Instructional Aide grading papers and

having access to grades is a dilemma, but the policy cannot cover all possible

situations. The policy states that the Instructional Aide may not have access

to student records (not grades).

Kaplan felt that the "685" course is not necessary, that

699 should be used. Hom stated that having a new course will not stop

the abuse of 699. He was further concerned that an Instructional Aide could

earn a total of 10 units toward graduation by earning 6 units through 699 and

4 units through 685. Cherny observed that the ethics of the faculty and

department chairs should stop the use of 699 for this purpose. He further mentioned

that the Golden Gater article on current Instructional Aides focused

on what a good job the Aides were doing helping the instructor, not on learning

objectives. He felt that if there are no learning objectives, the students should

be paid not earning course credit.

Barnes wondered if there was rampant abuse of 699. Smith replied

that the abuse appears to be widespread, but people won't talk about it. Matson

pointed out that this policy does not prohibit using 699 for the same purpose

as the "685." Rivas leant his support to the policy since it

adds organization to teaching practice, it is equitable for students and faculty,

and it is a guide for faculty to be more effective as educators. "685"

educates students about possibilities and guides faculty to consider teaching

possibilities. Kelley supported the policy in the hopes that this would

make the use of Instructional Aides so onerous so as to eliminate the use of

Instructional Aides.

Chen said he had experience teaching several courses which involve

Instructional Aides. He felt that graduate students should be utilized as Instructional

Aides, not undergraduates, and that Instructional Aides should not be given

keys to the lab.

Cherny/Matson moved to amend the policy to add the following on page

1, under Definitions, at the end of the first paragraph, "It is not appropriate

for students to participate in these activities under any other course number

or name." Banerjee stated that his department already has another

course (not 699) that is used for this purpose and questioned why they should

need to do the paper work for a new course. Bernstein reiterated that

"685" is for purposes that cannot be handled under 699. Kelley

clarified that an existing course that is used for the same purpose would not

have to go through CRAC to create a new course. The course number could be changed

by going through the Course Review Committee. M/S/P (Michaels, Bernstein)

to close debate on the admendment. The vote was taken and the motion to

amend passed.

Hom questioned what kind of student will be allowed to take this course

since there is no minimum GPA or prerequisite. M/S/P (Kelley, Scoble)

to move to second reading. Smith stressed that the policy says the student

must be in good academic standing and that the instructor chooses which students

can enroll in "685". Imahori further stated that the student

must have passed the course for which they are serving as an Instructional Aide.

Matson questioned whether the sign up procedure for "685" is

just like the sign up procedure for 699. Smith replied that it was. M/S/P

(Bernstein, Johnson) to close debate. The vote was taken and the policy

was approved (ayes: 25, nays: 17, abstentions: 5).

Agenda Item #6 - Cornerstones Discussion

Respectfully submitted,

Bonnie Homan

Secretary to the Faculty