Minutes of the Academic Senate Meeting of February 25, 1997
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, Janet Buchholz,
Yu-Charn Chen, Robert Cherny, James Collier, Jerry Duke, Gerald Eisman, Ken
Fehrman, Newman Fisher, Helen Gillotte, Helen Goldsmith, Peter Haikalis, Ann
Hallum, Jennifer Hammett, Caroline Harnly, Mary Ann Haw, David Hemphill, Marlon
Hom, Bonnie Homan, Rick Houlberg, Todd Imahori, Dane Johnson, Herb Kaplan, James
Kelley, Wanda Lee, Lois Lyles, Hollis Matson, Eunice McKinney-Aaron, Eugene
Michaels, Abdiel OÃ±ate, Raymond Pestrong, Mark Phillips, Mario Rivas,
Roberto Rivera, Don Scoble, Peggy Smith, Lee Sprague, Dawn Terrell, Lana Thomson,
Thaddeus Usowicz, Marilyn Verhey, Patricia Wade, Mary Ann Warren, Nancy Wilkinson,
Alfred Wong, Yim Yu Wong, Darlene Yee.
Senate Members Absent: George Woo (exc.), Kenneth Walsh, Joel
Nicholson, Jay Schrock, Penelope Warren(exc.), Will Flowers, Gary Hammerstrom(exc.),
Thomas La Belle(exc.), Robert Corrigan(exc.).
Senate Interns Present: Jaymee Sagisi, Sabrina Mehrok.
Guests: E. Zwillinger, A. Hurley, P. Vaughn, N. Fielden, P.
Fonteyn, E. Seibel, G. Whitaker, T. Sampson, J. Kassiola, M. Mallare,V. Thompson,
K. Monteiro, T. Ehrlich, M. Kasdan, J. Randolph, P. Armstrong, E. Solomon, G.
West, B. Murphy, V. Casella, S. Shimanoff, M. PeÃ±a.
Announcements and Report
Chair Phillips introduced Ray Pestrong/Geosciences as new Senator at-large.
Agenda Item #1 - Approval of Agenda for Meeting of February 25, 1997
As there were no objections, the agenda was approved as printed.
Agenda Item #2 - Approval of Minutes for Meeting of February 11, 1997
Usowicz requested that on page 3, paragraph 5, the 5th line be amended
to read "computer labs."
Cherny suggested that on page 2, Item #3 (LaBelle's report), since
the review of the Baccalaureate is still in progress, the minutes should reflect
that these items have been discussed, not completed. Cherny further
suggested that on page 2, Item #4, Vice Chancellor West stated his intention
to close all gaps. So he requested that the phrase "not salaries"
be omitted. The minutes were approved as amended.
Agenda Item #3 - Proposed Changes in MS Counseling: Concentration MFCC,
Masters of Science in Rehabilitation Counseling
CRAC Chair Ann Hallum introduced this item and introduced Gene Zwillinger
as a resource. This proposal is to strengthen the second year clinical sequence
by providing a greater opportunity for students to receive continued clinical
supervision throughout their course of study. The intent is to introduce a new
clinical course and adjust the units in the clinical sequence. There are no
resource implications from this proposal. It was M/S/P (Kaplan, Barnes) to
approve the item.
Agenda Item #4 - Proposed Changes in the School Counseling Specialization
CRAC Chair Ann Hallum introduced this item and introduced Audrey
Hurley who was present to answer any questions. This proposal is to strengthen
the core curriculum and to make the curriculum consistent with the professional
demands within the field and align it with the new competencies required for
school counselors. The changes consist of re-ordering the existing course requirements
and re-ordering the structure of how it is offered. There are no resource implications
from this proposal. As there was no debate in second reading, it was M/S/P
(Matson, Ferhman) to approve the item.
Agenda Item #5 - Proposed Policy on Undergraduate Instructional Aides
APC Chair Peggy Smith re-introduced this item still in first reading.
The committee incorporated some of the changes suggested in the previous senate
meeting, re-arranging the order to make it more consistent, and re-wording some
areas for clarification.
Smith emphasized several points in the policy. The faculty of record
must be present whenever the class is formally in session. While it may be unusual
to have an instructor also be a supervisor, it is not unique. Students need
to be aware of the normal grievance procedures to protect themselves if faculty
abuse this dual role. The issue of the Instructional Aide grading papers and
having access to grades is a dilemma, but the policy cannot cover all possible
situations. The policy states that the Instructional Aide may not have access
to student records (not grades).
Kaplan felt that the "685" course is not necessary, that
699 should be used. Hom stated that having a new course will not stop
the abuse of 699. He was further concerned that an Instructional Aide could
earn a total of 10 units toward graduation by earning 6 units through 699 and
4 units through 685. Cherny observed that the ethics of the faculty and
department chairs should stop the use of 699 for this purpose. He further mentioned
that the Golden Gater article on current Instructional Aides focused
on what a good job the Aides were doing helping the instructor, not on learning
objectives. He felt that if there are no learning objectives, the students should
be paid not earning course credit.
Barnes wondered if there was rampant abuse of 699. Smith replied
that the abuse appears to be widespread, but people won't talk about it. Matson
pointed out that this policy does not prohibit using 699 for the same purpose
as the "685." Rivas leant his support to the policy since it
adds organization to teaching practice, it is equitable for students and faculty,
and it is a guide for faculty to be more effective as educators. "685"
educates students about possibilities and guides faculty to consider teaching
possibilities. Kelley supported the policy in the hopes that this would
make the use of Instructional Aides so onerous so as to eliminate the use of
Chen said he had experience teaching several courses which involve
Instructional Aides. He felt that graduate students should be utilized as Instructional
Aides, not undergraduates, and that Instructional Aides should not be given
keys to the lab.
Cherny/Matson moved to amend the policy to add the following on page
1, under Definitions, at the end of the first paragraph, "It is not appropriate
for students to participate in these activities under any other course number
or name." Banerjee stated that his department already has another
course (not 699) that is used for this purpose and questioned why they should
need to do the paper work for a new course. Bernstein reiterated that
"685" is for purposes that cannot be handled under 699. Kelley
clarified that an existing course that is used for the same purpose would not
have to go through CRAC to create a new course. The course number could be changed
by going through the Course Review Committee. M/S/P (Michaels, Bernstein)
to close debate on the admendment. The vote was taken and the motion to
Hom questioned what kind of student will be allowed to take this course
since there is no minimum GPA or prerequisite. M/S/P (Kelley, Scoble)
to move to second reading. Smith stressed that the policy says the student
must be in good academic standing and that the instructor chooses which students
can enroll in "685". Imahori further stated that the student
must have passed the course for which they are serving as an Instructional Aide.
Matson questioned whether the sign up procedure for "685" is
just like the sign up procedure for 699. Smith replied that it was. M/S/P
(Bernstein, Johnson) to close debate. The vote was taken and the policy
was approved (ayes: 25, nays: 17, abstentions: 5).
Agenda Item #6 - Cornerstones Discussion
Secretary to the Faculty