SF State Academic Senate           

Seven Hills Conference Center – Nob Hill Room

2/19/2013

Academic Senate minutes

 

 

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.

 

ATTENDANCE:

Alvarenga, Gabriela

Anderson, David

Avani, Nathan

Azadpur, Mohammad

Barranco, Joseph

Bartscher, Patricia

Bettinger, Chris

Boyle, Andrea

Buckley, Linda

Burke, Adam

Carleton, Troy

Chen, Lily

Chernoff, Maxine

Cholette, Susan

Clavier, Sophie

Cleary, John

Collins, Robert

Drennan, Marie

Evans, Gail

 

Gamboa, Yolanda

Ganji, Ahmad

Gerber, Nancy

Ginwala, Cyrus

Hanley, Lawrence

Harris, Shimina

Hayes, Nancy

Hellman, David

Holzman, Barbara

Hood, Pamela

Howard, Pamela

Lau, Jenny

Li, Wen-Chao

Linder, Martin

Lopez, Eurania

Mendolla, Paul

Pellaud, Isabelle

 

Rosser, Sue

Rourke, David

Salama, Mohammad

Sigmon, Mark

Steier, Saul

Tumbat, Gulnur

Usowicz, Thaddeus

Vasche, Jason

Wanek, Linda

Williams, Robert

Wong, Les

Yee-Melichar, Darlene

Yoo, Grace

 

Absences: Ara, Mitra (abs) Baines, AnnMarie (exc); Donohue, Patricia (exc); Getz, Trevor (on leave); Lewis, Julia (exc); Lau, Jenny (on leave); Prive, Alice (abs); Stowers, Genie (exc); Strong, Robert (exc);

 

Guests: Brian Beatty, Sacha Bunge, Ann Hallum, Don Krueger, Phoebe Kwan, Shawn Whalen 

 

CALL TO ORDER: 2:10 p.m.

With a quorum present, the meeting was called to order

 

ANNOUNCEMENTS

  • (Buckley)  WASC reviewers will be visiting March 5.  Currently uncertain about which departments will be interviewed. It will be best if all departments are prepared to be approached by WASC reviewers with information on Student Learning Outcomes and department response to student assessment.

 

  1. Approval of the Minutes for February 5, 2013
  • This item was discussed.  Moved by (Chair Hanley)
  • The following points were made:
  1. Minutes are approved as submitted by general consent.

 

  1. Approval of the Agenda for February 19, 2013
  • This item was discussed.  Moved by (Chair Hanley)
  • The following points were made:
  1.  Agenda is approved as submitted by general consent.

 

  1. Chair’s Report
  • This item was discussed.  Moved by (Chair Hanley)
  • The following points/highlights/themes were made:
  1.   Sarlo Foundation support ($5,000) will cease after the current nominations/awards period.  A replacement fund to support teaching as well as scholarship and service is underway.
  2.   SIMS to CMS conversion is underway.  This project is broad in scope.  A report will highlight the road map.
  3.   Course Evaluation implementation is in progress for a target of Fall 2013.  Convenience and sustainable practices will hopefully temper and  balance those questions and concerns by those groups and individuals impacted by the implementation.

 

  1. Report: Standing Committee Chairs & CSU Senators—Brief Updates
  • This item was discussed.  Moved by (Chair Hanley)
  • The following points were made:
  1. APC  (Chernoff) –    Revised the Interdisciplinary Committee charge/policy as well as the CTFD Advisory Board composition
  2. CRAC (Stowers) -    no report available
  3. FAC (Vaughn) –  Updating policies impacted by the Collective Bargaining Agreement; Hiring of Temporary Faculty, Leaves with Pay Policy;  Administration of Teaching Evaluations;  as well as Temporary Faculty Evaluation Form    
  4. SIC (Williams) –   APRC structure, membership, and processes for streamlining the committee’s work; Ombudsman idea is in progress; Online Education and the role of the senate in this matter
  5. SAC (Lopez)  –   Update from Capital Planning, Design and Construction to discuss concerns regarding shuttle system and transportation; Heard a report on the Mental Health Initiative, and Campus Safety; Student representation and involvement in the senate is pending
  6. Statewide:  (Linder)  Developing advocacy talking points for legislators (related to greater efficiencies and lean budget); (Boyle)  On Thursday, March 7th from 12 PM – 5 PM (Redwood City) a reading focusing on the “Campus as a Living Lab”; Compass Steering Committee two-day meeting on March 8/9th (in Redwood City at Cañada College) focusing on Future of General Education (Yee-Melichar)  (1)  BoT baccalaureate unit limits discussion on the process of exceptions; (2) Action Plan on reporting Access to Excellence and reducing achievement gaps;  (3)  Online Education Initiatives (CalState Online, MOOCs, Udacity items) to produce a white paper in May 2013; (4)  Create a Task Force to study student tuition and fees along with financial aid support/Reaffirming Importance of  and Access to Graduate Programs support/ Support for Student Mental Health and Counseling Initiatives;  (5) Reviewed a recent draft of the Chancellor’s Office Executive Order related to extended education and self-support courses;

 

 

  1. Report: from Brian Beatty, AVP Academic Affairs Operations:  Update on CMS Process/SIMS Conversion
  • This item was discussed.  Moved by (Chair Hanley)
  • The following points/highlights were made:
  1. Introduction of Don Krueger, Project Director
  2. Two-page Summary was discussed and available on the Ilearn website.
  3. Common Management Systems (CMS) is the PeopleSoft suite of databases operating as a successor to SIMS (Student Information Management System).  SIMS is being discontinued.
  4. There should be no impact on the new GE curriculum
  5. The following points/questions were made:
    1. Has the delay in adopting PeopleSoft assumed a concern in making this transition?; What are the summarized elements for the management of this student data relevant to the faculty and academic department staff experience; What are the timeframes around training for AOCs/staff users?; What are the possibilities around an electronic RTP process?; What are the possibilities around an electronic recommendation process for students?;  How will the conversion affect student records or the student experience in accessing these records?; To what extent will faculty/academic staff be involved in design development?; Is this conversion cost neutral or what is the project’s overall cost?;  Why was the course proposal process halted to support the implementation of the new system?  Could temporary staff be considered to support the new course proposal process?;

 

  1. Recommendation from the Faculty Affairs Committee: Proposed Revisions to the Evaluation of Tenured Faculty for Professional Development and Support Policy (S00-122), 1st Reading
  • This item was discussed.  Moved by (Salama)
  • The following points/Highlights were made:
  1.    These revisions are to bring the policy current based on changes from the collective bargaining agreement
  2.   The following points/questions were made:
    1.  Lines 60, 61 & 104, 108, and April Calendar item references Academic Affairs separate from Faculty Affairs.  These references may require clarity; What is the relevance of this policy (related to rewards or accountability)?; Why is “professional development and support” the focus of the evaluation rather than excellence in teaching?; How are the changes identified for clarity?; The original policy’s history was discussed; line 47 “all classes” definition might require further clarity; Faculty incentive and support may be considered

 

  1. Recommendation from the Faculty Affairs Committee: Proposed Revisions to the RTP Policy (F11-241), 1st Reading
  • This item was discussed.  Moved by (Salama)
  • The following points/Highlights were made:
  1.    These revisions are to bring the policy current based on changes from the collective bargaining agreement
  2.   The following points/questions were made:
    1.  Line 325 addresses “all classes”  supervisory classes may be in conflict with anonymity and might need to be excluded; Lines 326 and 327 mentions Fall 2012 and might need language to address those faculty who have not met that deadline ; Line 553 may need to be reviewed for further clarity; Might FAC approach the Administration regarding
  3. Move (Sigmon) item to second reading, second (Salama)
  4. The motion fails by majority vote (with one abstention), the item remains  in 1st reading and will return to the senate body at a future meeting

 

  1. Recommendation from the Academic Senate Executive Committee:  Proposed Senate Meeting Schedule for Academic Year 2013/2014,1st Reading
  • This item was discussed.  Moved by (Ginwala)
  • The following points/Highlights were made:
  1. The proposed meeting schedule was reviewed
  2. Move (Holzman) to second reading, second (Hellman)
  3. The item was moved to second reading
  4. Move (Ginwala) to amend the Proposed Senate Meeting Schedule by “Deleting the Senate meeting on 12/3; adding a Standing Committee meeting on 12/3; and adding a Senate meeting on 12/10”, second (Steier)
  5. The motion passes by majority vote
  6. The item is passed as amended by majority vote

 

  1. Adjournment—no later than 5:00p. 
  • Moved by (Collins), seconded (Rourke).
  • Meeting is adjourned by majority vote

 

Adjournment:  3:40 PM

 

The following documents were shared and discussed within the agenda:

  1. Proposed Revisions to the RTP Policy
  2. Proposed Revisions to the University Interdisciplinary Council
  3. Proposed Senate Meeting Schedule