Annual SFSU Retreats Policy

Reference Number: S93-185
Senate Approval Date: Friday, January 01, 1993

Academic Senate Policy on Annual SFSU Retreats



At its meeting of April 27, 1993, the Academic Senate approved the following policy on annual retreats at San Francisco State University:

The academic retreats are sponsored by the Academic Senate. Thus, the responsibility for planning each retreat falls to the Senate Executive Committee. Since both internal and external events have and could again influence retreat planning, an Executive Committee, present or future, could make decisions about any specific retreat that may upset any "grand plan" we might devise. What follows is a proposal that represents the intent, all things being equal, of the current Executive Committee for future retreats. Specifically, the proposal contains the following points.


Off-campus retreats would continue to be held biennially according to the pattern currently established. Thus the next off-campus retreat would be in 1995 and they would continue to be held in odd-numbered years.



There are many who feel that a true retreat must be held off-campus in order to generate the spirit of camaraderie and community that we have treasured in the past.


In the alternate, even-numbered years, retreats would be held on campus. From a programmatic perspective, we can do everything on-campus that we can do off-campus. Plenary sessions, small group meetings, and meals can be held using campus facilities. In fact, attendees who wish to stay on-campus could be accommodated in the Guest Center.



Holding alternate year retreats on-campus would make them more accessible for members of the campus community who have generally not been able to attend off-campus retreats due to the expense. These would include junior faculty, staff members, and students. Also, by having access to computer and other specialized facilities, things can be done on-campus that would be very difficult if not impossible to do off-campus.


The Retreat Program Planning Committee would become a permanent rather than an ad hoc committee. Each College, the Library, and other campus constituencies including students, staff, and administration, should be represented on the RPPC. Members should be selected by their constituencies for two or three year terms so that one-half to one-third of the committee turns over each year.



A permanent program planning committee would provide a continuity that has been missing in the ad hoc committees. Although the RPPCs in recent years have done a marvelous job, they have spun their wheels at times learning the job.


The Director of the Center for the Enhancement of Teaching should be an ex-officio member of the Retreat Program Planning Committee.



One of the functions of the CET is to "develop and/or sponsor a variety of activities designed to advance teaching_[including] workshops, colloquia, symposia, one-on-one mentoring, opportunities to observe and be observed by master teachers_[etc.]." The retreats, whether held on or off-campus provide an excellent opportunity to conduct many of these activities. After all, they are held during "professional development" days.


The Retreat Program Planning Committee should elect two of its members as co-chairs.



Past retreat programs have successfully mingled a variety of different events, some related to a retreat theme, some recreational, and some Chautauqua-like and eclectic in nature. Thus, one co-chair concentrating on the advancement of teaching and one co-chair focusing on thematic elements of the program would be useful.


Arrangements for the retreats should continue to be managed by the Academic Senate Office.



The retreats are sponsored by the Academic Senate. It is appropriate for arrangements to remain the responsibility of the Senate Office and for decisions in this regard to be made by the Academic Senate Executive Committee.