ACADEMIC SENATE MEETING

MINUTES

Tuesday, February 28,
2012

SEVEN HILLS
CONFERENCE CENTER

NOB HILL ROOM

2:00 - 5:00 p.m.

 

 

OPEN FLOOR PERIOD:  2:00 -
2:10 p.m.

The Open Floor Period
provides an informal opportunity for faculty members to raise questions or make
comments directed to Senate officers or to university administrators.  Please arrive promptly at 2:00 p.m.

 

CALL TO ORDER: 2:10 p.m.

ATTENDANCE:

 

 

Alvarenga, Gabriela

Gamboa, Yolanda

Salama, Mohammad

Anderson, David

Getz, Trevor

Serber, Stacy

Azadpuar, Mohammad

Ginwala, Cyrus

Sherwin, Paul

Barranco, Joseph

Hanley, Lawrence

Sigmon, Mark

Bartscher, Patricia

Hayes, Nancy

Steier, Saul

Beatty, Brian

Hellman, David

Stowers, Genie

Bolter, Nicole

Henderson,
Barbara

Strong, Rob

Chernoff, Maxine

Holzman, Barbara

Trautman, Ray

Cholette, Susan

Li, Wen-Chao

Usowicz, Thaddeus

Collins, Robert

Linder, Martin

Vaughn, Pamela

Dariotis, Wei Ming

Lopez, Eurania

Wanek, Linda

Drennan, Marie

Privé, Alice

Wang, Lihua

Ferreira, Jason

Rothman, Barry

 

 

Absences: Boyle, Andrea (exc);
Chen, Lily (abs); Cleary, John (abs); Corrigan, Robert (exc);
Davis, Harvey “Skip” (exc); Gutierrez III, Andrew
(abs); Hood, Pamela (abs); Hyun, Helen (exc); Lau,
Jenny (exc); McCracken, Bridget (exc);  Ozluk,
Ozgur (leave Spring 2012); Rosser, Sue V. (exc); Rourke, David  (exc); Taylor,
Don (abs);  Vredenburg, Vance (leave Spring 2012); Wagner,
Venise  (leave
Spring 2012); Yee-Melichar, Darlene (exc)

 

Guests: Linda Buckley; Sacha Bunge, Gene Chelberg, Bruce Heiman, Husam Erciyes, Helen Goldsmith,
Wendy Johnson, Shawn Whalen

With a quorum being present, the meeting
was called to order.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Announcements
were made.

AGENDA ITEM #1—Approval of the Minutes for February 14, 2012

The Minutes were Approved.

 

AGENDA ITEM #2—Approval of the Agenda for February 28, 2012

The Agenda was Approved.

 

AGENDA ITEM #3—Chair’s Report

The Academic Senate heard a
report from Chair Vaughn on looking to the future and future Academic Senate
leadership.

 

AGENDA ITEM #4—Report form CFA Chapter President, Wei Ming Dariotis

The Academic Senate heard a
report from CFA Chapter President, Wei Ming Dariotis
on the process of collective bargaining, an update on current contract
negotiations, and chapter building.

 

The following concerns and
questions were raised:

 

1.     Is
it not important for the union to get a contract instead of supporting a ballot
initiative?

2.     Are
we at the point of final impasse? 
Where are we in the negotiation process?

3.     Does
the CFA have any opinions or statements on the most recent decisions by the CSU
Board of Trustees?

4.     What
plans might the union have for addressing our current
situation and potential layoffs in the future?

5.     Who
is actually sponsoring the “Day of Action”? Has it been posted on Facebook,
Twitter, or the CFA website?

 

 

AGENDA ITEM #5—Report from Senate Appointees to Franciscan
Shops Board of Directors, Bruce Heiman and David
Hellman

The Academic Senate heard a
report from Senate Appointees to Franciscan Shops Board of Directors, Bruce Heiman and David Hellman.

 

The following concerns and
questions were raised:

 

1.     How
long has Franciscan Shops been giving donations to the university?

2.     What
are the benefits of having a private bookstore run the campus bookstore?

 

AGENDA ITEM #6—Recommendation from the Executive Committee:
Proposed Library Advisory Committee Policy—2nd Reading

The Item was discussed. Senator
Collins moved to “Call the Question”. The motion carried. The voted was called.
The motion carried. The recommendation was Approved.

 

AGENDA ITEM #7—Recommendation from Curriculum Review &
Approval Committee: Proposed Online Education Policy, 1st Reading

Senator Stowers
explained the policy. The Item was discussed. Senator Salama
motioned to move the Item to Second Reading. The motion failed. The Item will
return at a future meeting in first reading.

 

The following questions were
raised:

 

1.     Why
do we need an Online Education Policy? What added value does a new policy have?

2.    
To what extent does this new policy apply to all
courses?

3.    
The differences between current education policy
and this new Online Education Policy need to be taken into consideration.

 

AGENDA ITEM #8—Recommendation from the Faculty Affairs
Committee: Proposed Revisions to the Retention, Tenure & Promotion Policy,
Academic Senate Policy #F11-241, 1st Reading

Senator Salama
moved and explained the Item. The Item was discussed. The Item will return at a
future meeting.

 

The following questions were
raised:

 

1.     Is
it possible to have the colleges select their own representatives?

2.     Is
it possible to address the threshold currently set so that it is proportional
given college restructuring?

3.     Is
it possible to address the logic behind the implied workload within this policy?

4.     It
is possible to examine what constitutes a majority within the policy?

5.     It
is possible to examine the service terms of UTPC members? Should the terms be
longer? 

6.     Is
it possible to have member from - or familiar with - the areas and fields
within Creative Arts and Liberal Studies?

7.     Is
there a reason that the committee must have a fixed size?

8.     Is
it possible to have college level committees instead of a university level
committee?

 

AGENDA ITEM #9—Adjournment—no later than 5:00p.

The Academic Senate
adjourned at 3:42 p.m.