San Francisco State University Academic Senate

Agenda of March 9, 1999

The Academic Senate was called to order by Acting Chair Dawn Terrell at 2:10

p.m.

Senate Members Present:

Aaron, Eunice; Barnes, Paul; Bartscher, Patricia; Bernstein, Marian; Bhat,

Subodh; Cancino, Herlinda; Chen, Yu-Charn; Cherny, Robert; Consoli, Andres;

Corrigan, Robert; Craig, JoAnn; Cullers, Susan; Duke, Jerry; Elia, John; Fehrman,

Ken; Ferretti, Charlotte; Flowers, Will; Goldsmith, Helen; Gonzales, Angela;

Graham, Minnie; Gregory, Jan; Harnly, Caroline; Haw, Mary Ann; Hom, Marlon;

Hu, Sung; Jenkins, Lee; Jerris, Scott; Johnson, Dane; La Belle, Thomas; Oñate,

Abdiel; Raggio, Marcia; Scoble, Don; Shapiro, Jerald; Simeon, Roblyn; Smith,

Miriam; Swanson, Deborah; Terrell, Dawn; Turitz, Mitch; Valledares, Juan; Vaughn,

Pamela; Verhey, Marilyn; Wade, Patricia; Warren, Mary Anne; Warren, Penelope;

Wong, Alfred; Yee, Darlene.

Senate Members Absent: Alvarez, Alvin(exc.); Contreras, Rey;

Shrivastava, Vinay; Fox-Wolfgramm, Susan(exc.); Graham, Michael(exc.); Moss,

Joanna; Strong, Rob(exc.); Choo, Freddie; Phillips, Mark(exc.); Tarakji, Ghassan;

Eisman, Gerald; Kelley, James(exc.); Collier, James(exc.); Montenegro, Ricardo;

Vega, Sandra.

Senate Interns Present:

Guests: R. Maghroori, G. West, P. Guitron, M. Rees, B. Luzardi,

P. Ricketts, C. Gaglio, G. Whitaker.

Announcements and Report

Chair’s Report

  • Acting Chair Dawn Terrell reported that the Executive Committee of the Academic

    Senate had a brief, productive exchange on February 26, 1999 with Trustee

    Lawrence Gould, who is on the Trustee's collective bargaining committee.

  • Statewide Academic Senator Eunice Aaron reported on her attendance

    at CSU legislative day where the Fiscal and Governmental Affairs Committee

    was updated on a number of the 1,400 or so bills floating around that may

    impact the quality of education. During the visit, they also asked legislators

    to remember that one of the reasons we're suffering this tremendous reduction

    in teaching ranks is because the profession is not attractive and compensation

    is part of that.

Agenda Item #1 - Approval of Agenda for March 9, 1999

M/S/P (Duke/Fehrman) to delete Agenda Item #7, the proposed revisions

to A.S. Policy #F87-32, Graduate Student Award for Distinguished Achievement.

The agenda was approved as amended.

Agenda Item #2 - Approval of Minutes for February 23, 1999

The minutes were approved as printed.

Agenda Item #3 - Report from Vice President La Belle

Provost La Belle provided a mid-year overview of some of the independent actions

that have been taken over the past year and a half relative to the curriculum

and academic progress for the students.

He went over a chart that outlines Programs and Policies for Undergraduate

Student Progression at SFSU. Entering lower division students are tested and

placed, and then go through mandatory advising, orientation, and registration.

There is a new initiative on academic orientation, and there are many different

activities and initiatives tied to retention, remediation, and mandatory advising.

Moving on to entering upper-division students, La Belle highlighted advising

for entry to the major and the upper-division, advising at the graduation point,

and outcomes assessment. He also foregrounded the array of policies and services

to facilitate student progress no matter where the student is, reviewing Academic

and Student Affairs programs related to retention as well as recent Senate policies

related to retention. He emphasized that it is the totality that we are after,

trying to support students and increase the likelihood of success.

Robert Cherny asked if there is discussion under way on creating courses

that teach students how to be college students?

La Belle answered that it's a combination. There is already a library requirement

in place, and we would work on study skills and time management with these courses

probably lodged in colleges, but there would be some standard units. Some of

it would be done on the web and some of it would be done face to face. Elsewhere,

for example, some others do alcohol and drug abuse, and a whole host of things

that might be brought into student life. It would be an orientation to the university,

it would be required, and it will be coming back to the Senate for approval.

Darlene Yee suggested that interaction be encouraged among the people

doing advising at the different points. She also suggested that minors be included

in the box that says "Advising at entry to major." La Belle added that they

are trying to get faculty teaching math and English to meet with tutorial people

from outside.

Jan Gregory asked who is creating the course and how La Belle sees other

courses being developed. La Belle answered that the prototype course for Liberal

Studies and Education at the freshman level is being developed by Susan Taylor,

Dean of Undergraduate Studies; the Liberal Studies Council; and Elementary Education

faculty. By developing units around some of the topics, some would be exportable,

like study skills. Faculty would need some training and orientation to teach

these courses, and we would probably ask for volunteers.

Gregory followed up by asking if it would be a unit-bearing course and if the

Academic Senate and normal faculty curricular processes would be brought to

bear. La Belle replied that the courses would be for graduation units and that

the standard faculty curricular oversight would definitely be in place.

Jerry Duke asked about the resources for such orientation courses. La

Belle replied that we'll have to face up to that issue but that we should remember

that we're trying to increase the probability that students have success. He

re-emphasized that research shows that orientation helps students be successful.

JoAnn Craig asked if it would be useful to have the cross-cultural aspects

of succeeding in an American university for those who come from foreign universities.

La Belle agreed that it is an important issue.

Abdiel Oñate asked about the impact on faculty time of fully

implementing the advising as outlined on the chart. La Belle answered that of

the five advising points, two of them are at the university level and three

at the college level. We felt that this was the minimum amount of time to ask

that a student see a faculty person. Colleges and departments are working on

this in different way, using computers, staff, students, and faculty in various

combinations.

Aaron commented that Chancellor Reed has promised to do everything possible

to make the CSU responsive to our constituents, and in order to do that, he

has made the commitment to make the CSU work 12 months per year, 6 days per

week, and 12 hours per day. Aaron urged La Belle to bear in mind the importance

of good advising when he discusses these issues with his counterparts. While

electronic advising will get to more people, there is a great deal to be said

about face to face advising, particularly with new students, and that takes

faculty time and faculty resources.

La Belle added a footnote to Aaron's comment, saying that we are trying to

use the power of the web and computers to develop tools that can be used by

the faculty member and student, pulling up records, for example, or resources

to guide them in the advising process. Where faculty members might be most useful

is as a good listener, a responder, for we know that students who spend time

with faculty outside of classroom get much more out of their education.

Agenda Item #4 - Proposed Calendar for the 2000-2001 Academic Year

Academic Policies Committee Chair Helen Goldsmith introduced the attached recommendation

for the 2000-2001 Academic Calendar, pointing to Senate Policy Resolution #RS95-142,

which sets the beginning of the Fall semester, and commending the hard work

of Barbara Luzardi, Academic Scheduling Coordinator.

Mitch Turitz asked why classes do not have finals at the time of the

class - why, for example, a Tuesday/Thursday class might have a final on Friday

night when the class does not meet on a Friday night. Luzardi, Goldsmith,

La Belle, and Pamela Vaughn all contributed to the following explanation:

given that finals are longer than most classes and that students should have

their finals distributed across the exam period, it is necessary that many finals

will not be on the time or day of regular class meetings. Assignments are then

made according to models that lessen and share the burden of having exams at

less attractive times.

President Robert Corrigan added that on his last three campuses, the

single most common student complaint is that faculty ignore the final exam schedule.

We should respect the final exam schedule and have a full class schedule.

Yee raised a question about how we as a campus might handle year-round

operations. Aaron responded that year-round operations will take lots

of extra hours with some of it done in a centralized fashion from Long Beach.

Cherny added that the Legislative Analyst's report on year-round operations

is on the web, and that the short answer is that it probably would not change

that much in the immediate future.

Vaughn asked about the lack of a review day on this calendar and the possibility

of having one on future calendars. Luzardi responded that the review day is

an optional day with no local or statewide requirement, and Goldsmith added

that it all has to do with days of the week and how many there are and how the

days work in that year.

M/S/P (Duke, Fehrman) to second reading.

M/S/P (Duke/Fehrman) to close debate.

The vote was taken and the proposed Academic Calendar for 2000-2001 passed

unanimously.

Agenda Item #5 - Proposed Revisions to the Bachelor of Science in Business:

Concentration in Entrepreneurial/Small Business Management

Curriculum Review and Approval Committee Chair Al Wong introduced the

proposed changes to the College of Business's undergraduate concentration in

entrepreneurial/small business management.

Goldsmith asked whether there were new prerequisites for minors. Connie

Gaglio, Co-Director of the Center for Enterprise and Assistant Professor of

Management, answered that nothing will be added for minors.

Deborah Swanson suggested that the elective English 414 should be shifted

to the junior year, semester 5, because English 414 and the JEPET are upper-division.

Gaglio said that they would make that adjustment.

M/S/P (Fehrman, Duke) to second reading.

Cherny asked about the total number of units. Gaglio responded that

they were not changing any of that and that it's the same as all the other ones.

M/S/P (Jerris/Fehrman) to close debate.

The vote was taken and the item passed unanimously.

Agenda Item #6 - Proposed Resolution on Memorial Grove

Student Affairs Committee Chair Ken Fehrman introduced this proposed

resolution to initiate efforts to better identify the location of the SFSU Memorial

Grove in order to raise awareness and enhance the utilization of the Grove.

Marian Bernstein wondered whether this resolution might go along with

improved signage on campus. Fehrman and most Senators nodded in vigorous agreement

while Terrell added that Student Affairs has already been looking at this issue.

Mary Anne Warren asked where the Grove is. Fehrman replied that this

is exactly one of the reasons for the resolution. It's in front of the gym,

there's a small rock with a small plaque, and then you wind your way into the

Grove.

M/S/P (Goldsmith/Fehrman) to second reading.

M/S/P (Minnie Graham/Fehrman) to close debate.

The vote was taken and the item passed unanimously.

The Senate was adjourned at 3:10 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Dane Johnson

Secretary to the Faculty