Minutes: April 1st, 1997

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

Meeting Date (Archive)