Minutes of the April 1, 1997 Academic Senate Meeting

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,
Yu-Charn Chen, Robert Cherny, James Collier, Robert Corrigan,
Jerry Duke, Gerald Eisman, Ken Fehrman, Will Flowers, Helen Gillotte,
Helen Goldsmith, Peter Haikalis, Ann Hallum, Gary Hammerstrom,
Caroline Harnly, Mary Ann Haw, Marlon Hom, Bonnie Homan, Rick
Houlberg, Todd Imahori, Dane Johnson, James Kelley, Thomas La
Belle, Wanda Lee, Lois Lyles, Hollis Matson, Eunice Aaron, Joel
Nicholson, Abdiel Oñate, Raymond Pestrong, Mark Phillips,
Elisabeth Prinz, Mario Rivas, Roberto Rivera, Don Scoble, Peggy
Smith, Dawn Terrell, Lana Thomson, Thaddeus Usowicz, Marilyn Verhey,
Patricia Wade, Mary Ann Warren, Penelope Warren, Nancy Wilkinson,
Yim Yu Wong.

Senate Members Absent: Herb Kaplan(exc.), Darlene
Yee(exc.), Kenneth Walsh, Jennifer Hammett, Rosa Casarez-Levison,
David Hemphill(exc.), Eugene Michaels, Alfred Wong, Janet Buchholz,
Newman Fisher(exc.), Lee Sprague, Michelle Cheng.

Senate Interns Present: Jaymee Sagisi.

Guests: D. Schafer, G. Whitaker, B. Alden, M. Mallare,
M. Turitz, L. Dong, T. Ehrlich, K. Johnson, G. Glugoski, S. Howard,
R. Dunlap.

Announcements and Report

Chair's Report

  • The Policy on Undergraduate Instructional Aides, which
    was approved by the Senate on February 25, 1997, was approved
    by the president without any changes.
  • A copy of the current draft of the Cornerstones report
    was received by the Academic Senate Chair. A method is being devised
    to distribute this draft report to the faculty. May 20 is the
    deadline for campus feedback on this draft.
  • The Ad Hoc Committee on Teaching Effectiveness Evaluation
    expects to have a proposed policy concerning teaching effectiveness
    evaluation, instrumentation, and administration of the evaluations
    available early in the fall semester.
  • Chair Phillips shared his remarks on PSSIs in honor of April
    Fools Day
    !

Congratulations to SFSU Gater Wrestling team, lead by Head
Coach Lars Jensen
, for winning the NCAA Division II National
Championship! Coach Jensen has been chosen as the 1997 National
Coach of the Year. Director of Athletics Betsy Alden displayed
the trophy. She then commented on the successful progress student
athletes are making in improving grades and graduation rates.
For Fall of 1995, 48 student athletes had a GPA of 3.0 or above.
For Fall of 1996, 88 student athletes had a GPA of 3.0 or above
and the Athletic Department is planning to continue increasing
these numbers. Last year, fifty student athletes graduated, including
sixteen football team members who decided to complete their degree
at SFSU even after the football program was disbanded. Sixty student
athletes and Department of Athletics personnel participate in
community service. All student athletes with a GPA below 2.5 must
attend mandatory study hall. These students used the Gater Life
Skills Center over 1200 times during the 1996/97 academic year.
The department is committed to providing a quality academic experience
for all student athletes. Alden then introduced Rosalyn Dunlap,
the Assistant Directory of Athletics for Compliance and Development,
and intern Scott Howard. Alden also reported that SFSU
is currently a member of the Northern California Athletic Conference
and will soon become a member of the California Athletic Collegiate
Association, a scholarship conference. Alden further reported
that five male swimmers went to the Division II National
Swimming Championships
. SFSU swimmers placed 13th out of 30
for men in the nation. She encouraged all Senators to attend athletic
events.

Agenda Item #1 - Approval of Agenda for Meeting of April 1,
1997

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

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

moved to amend page 4, the sixth paragraph, the second sentence
to read, "He felt the conference was important if the Chancellor
and Trustees learned of faculty concerns." The minutes were
approved as amended.

Agenda Item #3 - Election of Board Member to the Franciscan
Shops Board of Directors

Arturo Salazar/BACS agreed to run for another three-year
term. As there were no nominations from the floor, M/S/P (Matson,
Scoble) to close nominations. Salazar was elected by
acclamation.

Agenda Item #4 - Resolution Condemning Temple University's
Decision Re "Democracy Now!" Program

As there was no request for debate in first reading, M/S/P (Smith,
M.A. Warren) to move to second reading. There was also no debate
requested in second reading. M/S/P (Smith, Gillotte) to close
debate. The vote was taken and the resolution passed.

Agenda Item #6 - Proposed MA in Asian American Studies

CRAC Chair Ann Hallum introduced this item and introduced
Asian American Studies Chair Marlon Hom
as a resource. Hallum
stated that this was a 30-unit degree program with five modules.
She said that CRAC felt that the degree was well conceived and
strong in all the curricular design areas necessary to meet the
needs of students and the community.

Kelley questioned why this was not a consent item. Hallum
replied that CRAC was concerned about resources that seemed excessive
in view of the resources available to the University. She stated
that Hom had revised the resource section subsequent to CRAC questions
and recommendations. Hom responded that the resources were
asked for because the Department is already impacted due to heavy
G.E. enrollment. He said that in setting up an M.A. program, adjustments
had to be made in the Department and additional resource needs
were inevitable. The current faculty/student ratio in the Asian
American Studies Department is 1/40. Overall, the ratio for the
University is less than 1/30. He said that the department expects
the University to provide equitable resources comparable to other
graduate programs so that they may present a sound graduate program
and advising.

Banerjee asked if CRAC had met about the resource issue
since the revisions had been made. Hallum replied that
CRAC had not, since the revisions were considered to be minor.
CRAC felt that the curriculum is very strong and also felt that
the resource demands themselves were not excessive. Hallum reiterated
that CRAC questioned whether the demands could be met in the context
of the current University financial situation.

Matson asked, if the proposal passed, what are the potential
resource problems. Hom replied the original request was
for one additional FTE plus assigned time for graduate advising
for a total of 1.8 FTE. Hallum added that CRAC questioned the
request for additional graduate advising. CRAC had no objections
to the request for additional secretarial support since they now
share one secretary for three departments. Hom added that it is
actually one secretary for four departments.

M/S/P (Smith, Kelley) to move to second reading.

Matson questioned the request in the proposal for more
space and if the Senate passed the resolution whether this would
automatically commit University resources.

Discussion of this item was suspended temporarily as the Time
Certain for Item #5 was reached.

Agenda Item #5 - Report from Tom Ehrlich

Tom Ehrlich from the Office of Community Service Learning
introduced Kathryn Johnson also of this office. Ehrlich
began his report by saying that there is a five-year plan to enhance
Community Service Learning on the campus. He said that one of
the key proposals is to have an RFP process to support faculty
who want to have a Community Service Learning component in their
course. Funding support from the Chancellor's Office, President
Corrigan's Office and the campus is increasing as is the number
of faculty involved in Community Service Learning. A second proposal
was to consolidate efforts on campus. Ehrlich stated that the
Community Involvement Center (CIC) now comes under the Office
of Community Service Learning. In a campus survey of faculty,
80% of the respondents indicated an awareness of service learning.
These faculty understood why service learning can be important
to enhance academic learning in different fields as well as provide
civic and moral learning. The Community Service Learning steering
group met with each of the Deans and the Council of Academic Deans
about enhancing community service learning in each college.

Ehrlich reported that the plan that was developed and the
vision that was articulated for this campus is well on the way
to implementation. He felt that by the end of next year, there
should be a significant critical mass of faculty, beyond the original
involved faculty, promoting service learning. He said that the
CUSP proposal that incorporated the service learning plan that
was developed, called for a significant service learning opportunity
for every undergraduate by the end of five years. Ehrlich felt
that this was a realistic target.

Smith stated that the Academic Policies Committee (APC)
had been discussing community service learning and some questions
were raised by APC. Since so many of our students are already
involved in the community by working, volunteering, living, and
acting in the community, APC questioned how service learning is
really important for our urban students. Ehrlich replied
that he is enormously impressed by the numbers of students who
are involved in the community. However, some students see some
courses as hurdles to get over in order to get back to the community
doing those things. He felt that community service learning enhances
academic learning by experiential learning which is active learning.
Additionally, community service learning involves civic and moral
learning and should be available to all students.

Smith further commented that the internship programs that
already exist can take an enormous amount of faculty time, which
is often uncompensated time. APC questioned what effect incorporating
service learning into a course would have on faculty workload.
Ehrlich answered that one of the things that the Office
of Community Service Learning can provide is help with placements
in the community which can reduce that portion of the faculty
workload.

Smith said that APC also wondered whether volunteer work
can be mandated. Ehrlich responded that he is not pushing
requirements, but that his office requires a lot of subject matter
of learning, so he felt we can also require civic and moral learning
that goes along with the academic learning in service learning
courses.

Imahori questioned whether that civic and moral learning
could be provided in another venue. Ehrlich said he hopes
there is moral learning going on all the time as our students
watch their teachers in whatever form. Ehrlich recognized that
this learning can take place in many different ways.

Hammerstrom stated that the Community Service Learning
Program is providing a marvelous service to SFSU and he expressed
appreciation of all the efforts. Ehrlich thanked him and
the Senate.

Discussion of Agenda Item #6 continued:

Corrigan stated that the best and major role that faculty
can play in reviewing policy is evaluation of academic integrity
and quality. He said that faculty need to judge the quality, importance,
and necessity of the program being proposed. He felt that the
other appropriate campus units should be concerned with space
and finances. A Senate-approved program may not be implemented
right away because of resource limitations, but the Senate should
reach its conclusion about proposed courses based on the merits
of the proposal.

Hammerstrom agreed with the President and added that the
Senate should not be making specific program resource decisions
as that is what department chairs and administrators should decide.
However, he felt that Senators should inform themselves about
the resource needs and question how those resources should be
met, but he also felt that the Senate should not make resources
the over-riding consideration.

Cherny questioned the wording in Part 4 concerning electives
for a concentration. Since concentration has a particular meaning
on this campus and this proposal was implying a different meaning,
he suggested that "field of interest" could replace
the word "concentration." Hom explained that
what was intended was if a student has a particular emphasis in
Asian American Studies, then specific courses would be appropriate
for that emphasis. He was using concentration in the layman's
terms.

Lee questioned whether there is a masters level program
in Asian American Studies in the CSU or anywhere else for comparison.
Hom replied that the department felt that the attitude
in the greater society about accepting a masters in this subject
has changed and is now positive. In 1994, the CSU did a survey
concerning Asian/Pacific American Studies in the CSU and SFSU
was identified as the best in the CSU system. SFSU has the resources
in terms of faculty specializations and qualifications for both
a Bachelors and Masters degree. A student survey on this campus
showed support for these programs as well.

Turitz questioned whether there have been any studies done
to determine if the Library has the resources to support faculty
research in these areas. Hom replied that the Asian American
Studies Department has worked with the Library to ensure that
there will be sufficient resources to support a graduate program
in this area. Hom also stated that he is not concerned since graduate
research can also be done at UC Berkeley or Stanford. Turitz stated
that Stanford is a private institution and does not have to allow
our students access to their library. Hom responded that while
this is true, we have a good relationship with Stanford and he
has been doing research there for many years without difficulty.
M/S/P (Barnes, Matson) to close debate. The item passed unanimously.

Agenda Item #7 - Report from Greta Glugoski, CSU Academic Council
on International Programs (ACIP)

SFSU Representative to ACIP Greta Glugoski reported that
at the fall ACIP meeting, three major concerns were raised. The
role and status of OIP, whether it belongs in the Chancellor's
Office or in Academic Affairs. There is a study currently being
conducted to analyze this situation. The IP budget is a second
major concern since this program targets students who would not
ordinarily participate in international programs. They are working
at keeping the cost as low as possible so that non-traditional
students may go abroad. The third major concern was program development.
Currently they are working with 17 countries and over 70 host
institutions. The new activities that are being explored include
China, Korea, and various countries in Latin America. There is
a New Activities Survey to find out which campus programs are
involved with which countries and host universities.

Last spring, SFSU enrolled 1300 international students and sent
71 exchange students abroad. SFSU has the highest number of CSU
exchange students in the CSU system. This semester 87 SFSU students
were interviewed in hopes of going abroad. Many faculty helped
with this interview process. Glugoski mentioned Senator Cherny
for his help with interviews. Students are being sent to Canada,
Mexico, Taiwan, Japan, England, Spain, France, Italy, Germany,
Sweden, Denmark, and Israel. System-wide, there were 431 applications
reviewed for students going abroad. The applicants represent a
very diverse group of students, many of whom would not consider
going abroad without this program. Glugoski said she is also participating
in an interdisciplinary preliminary proposal with the Ford Foundation
called Crossing Borders, Revitalizing the Area Studies. If awarded,
this study could help expand the internationalization of the University.

Cherny thanked Glugoski for recruiting faculty members
to the program and especially for her many hours interviewing
students. He said that while SFSU had the largest group of exchange
applicants in the CSU, it was still a very small percentage of
the student body. He felt that the financial problem for students
is the most serious one inhibiting students from participating.

Imahori also thanked Glugoski for her work. He questioned
whether there is a scholarship plan available for students wanting
to study abroad. Glugoski replied that students pay SFSU
fees. Students can go to financial aid here and get stipends and
loans. Some international programs cost more than attending at
SFSU, but some actually cost less.

Mallare questioned what areas of expertise our students
pursue, what is the breakdown of graduate to undergraduate, and
are there programs geared toward the Pacific Rim. Glugoski
responded that there are programs in Taiwan, China, Korea, and
Japan and they are hoping to expand to the Philippines. The majority
of students are undergraduates with most in their junior year.
Glugoski also expressed a hope of having more graduate students
especially in health and human services. The areas of studies
pursued include International Studies, all areas of Business,
the Arts, History, Languages, Music, and Health Education.

Eisman stated that there are Business Education courses
available on-line in Malaysia including an MBA program from Ohio
University that is entirely on-line. He questioned whether OIP
includes distance education. He further stated that Indiana University
sends US faculty to Malaysia so that the first two years of courses
are offered in Malaysia and the students finish the last two years
in the US. He asked if there are plans to deliver our curriculum
overseas either through distance learning or an established campus.
Glugoski replied that to truly internationalize the University,
we must exchange both faculty and students.

Hammerstrom stated that the Chancellor's Office is conducting
a study of the centralized IP. There are 17 programs administered
through the Chancellor's Office of International Programs as well
as a whole range of campus programs. The Statewide Senate is studying
curricular issues with international programs. He said that in
some circumstances it can be cheaper for a student to go abroad
than to stay in San Francisco and take classes at SFSU.

Nicholson thanked Glugoski for her work. He described several
program-specific international programs and stated that for an
international program in Denmark, the Danish government provides
a 40% subsidy for housing while the Netherlands government provides
a complete housing subsidy for a program in the Netherlands. He
further described a system in Mexico that includes distance learning
and relationships with several US universities. Nicholson stated
that SFSU is now involved in discussions with this program.

Rivas commended Glugoski for her energy and enthusiasm
and the positive impact that she has on students. He offered his
support for the efforts to reach out to Latin America, the Philippines,
and other sites. He suggested that a formal report be made available
to the campus community to describe the programs and the types
of participants.

Aaron responded to Eisman saying that there are discussions
in the system about distance learning and other countries. One
of the major issues being raised concerns faculty ownership of
intellectual property.

Phillips thanked Glugoski for the presentation and her
work on the Committee since international programs are so central
to the mission of SFSU.

M/S/P (Aaron, Gillotte) to adjourn. The Senate was adjourned at
3:44 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Bonnie Homan
Secretary to the Faculty