of TUESDAY, April 15, 2003
Senate Members Present:
Senate Members Absent:
Corrigan, Robert A. (exc), Bernard-P0wers, Jane (abs), Blomberg, Judith
(abs), Collier, James (exc), Fung, Robert (exc), Gill, Sam (abs),
Gonzales, Dan (exc), Kassiola, Joel (exc), Stowers, Genie (exc), Smith,
Miriam (exc), Yang, Nina (exc), Otero, Aina J. (abs), (abs), Strong,
Rob (exc), Suzuki, Dean (exc), Newt-Scott, Ronda (abs), Wolfe, Bruce
(exc), (exc), Warren, Mary Anne (abs).
Guests:, Dan Buttlaire, Gene Chelberg, Rene Dahl, Elise Earthman,
Charlotte Ferretti, Helen Goldsmith, Ann Hallum, Richard Hoffman,
Susan Shimanoff, Marilyn Verhey, Gail Whitaker.
CALL TO ORDER 2:10 p.m.
Senate Chair Robert Cherny noted to all Senators
that a call for nominations for faculty to serve on University wide committees
would be sent by e-mail to all faculty and staff. Senators are asked to encourage
qualified faculty to submit their names as candidates for these important
The senate chair did not
give a report in order for the senate to have more time for discussion.
ITEM #1 - APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA FOR April 15,
Carrington) to approve the agenda as amended.
ITEM #2 - APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FOR April 1,
Turitz) to approve the minutes as corrected
ITEM #3 - Report: Associate Vice President Gail Whitaker.
reported on the current upper-division courses being offered on the campus
and on the plans for offering upper-division courses at the College
campus. She indicated that SFSU had been offering courses off campus for a
long time in a variety of locations. Some of the locations have been as far
away as Sacramento,
and Moss Landing, in the East
and all over the City. She indicated that there are a number of enrollment
issues that are generating the need to offer more courses off campus. Some
other off campus location provide better facilities than found on campus,
such as teaching law enforcement courses at the Police Academy and medical
courses at local hospitals. In all of these activities we are trying to increase
course offerings to the students in our service area in a way that will not
impact our overcrowded on-campus facilities. At CaÃ±ada
we are offering SFSU courses that are taught by SFSU faculty for students
to complete the last two years of their bachelor's degree. CaÃ±ada
students are able to complete a bachelor’s degree in Business Administration
and Child Development, and to complete a Teacher Preparation program for a
credential. They are required to meet the same academic standards as students
attending the same on-campus courses at SFSU. Presently, there are 600 students
participating in the CaÃ±ada College/SFSU bachelor programs. The agreement
and SFSU includes the assurance there are qualified faculty, adequate facilities,
parking, library and books available. The funding for this project is from
the legislature, it will run out in 2004 and we are looking for alternative
funding sources. The College
has two campuses. The main campus of the College
and a north campus called Indian Valley Campus. The North campus has historically
been under-enrolled and for some time the College
has considered closing the campus. Recently, they approached SFSU to see if
we want to offer a similar program at Indian
as we have at CaÃ±ada College.
This is attractive to College
of Marin since their facilities have more expanded use and also attractive
to SFSU since it would ease our campus crowding. We are presently in the discussion
process with the College
of Marin and President Corrigan has put forward a letter of intent. We are
now looking at all the options and working on the development of a Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU) between ourselves and College
asked if the students that attend these classes are enrolled as regular SFSU
students, or are they extension students, what is their status? AVP Whitaker
indicated that most of the students are enrolled SFSU students while some
are not yet admissible but will soon enroll. The ones who are not yet admissible
can take the course through College of Extended Learning (CEL). We expect
that the not yet admissible students will soon become SFSU students. The courses
are also available to already enrolled SFSU students. Senator Noble
asked if the units taken at either CaÃ±ada College
would be considered as residence units? AVP Whitaker
indicated that all SFSU courses offered at CaÃ±ada College
would be considered SFSU residence units. The courses will count toward graduation
requirements. Since Indian
is 28 miles away it falls outside the 25-mile limit. There may be some problems
with accreditation standards since we are restricted to a distance of 25 miles
for offering courses for residence credit. However, we believe we can work
this problem out. Senator Gregory
pointed out that parts of the presentation had turned some nouns into verbs.
She felt that this was a cleaver and creative use of the English language.
Senate Chair Cherny
asked how successful they have been in recruiting tenured and tenure track
faculty to teach at CaÃ±ada? AVP Whitaker
indicated that there are tenure and tenure-track faculty evolved in all the
programs. Additionally, College
accreditation requires a certain percentage of tenure and tenure-track faculty
to be permanently assigned to the program. Additionally, she indicated that
they are committed to tenure and tenure-track oversight of the programs. She
also indicated that they have opened up the teaching positions at CaÃ±ada College
to their faculty, but they must be approved by the faculty at SFSU to teach
the courses. Rene Dahl,
Recreation and Leisure Studies, coordinator of the CAD program, indicated
that it is an interdisciplinary program that draws many of the required classes
from other departments on SFSU campus. She indicated that the process of selecting
course to be taught at CaÃ±ada College
begins with the SFSU faculty looking at the courses that we offer on campus
to see if some could be offered at CaÃ±ada College.
Additional funding for the instructor to teach at CaÃ±ada College
comes from the SFSU administration and the departments get the FTES. Senator
shared his experience of actually participating in the program and teaching
at CaÃ±ada College
and cautioned that there are many differences between the administrative structures
of CaÃ±ada College
and SFSU. He found that the commute to CaÃ±ada College
was not difficult, but the instructional support for faculty, such as getting
the class door open, photo copying, library support, was too difficult to
operate in two systems and no longer teaches a course at CaÃ±ada College.
pointed out that there are differences between the two campus and that it
does take extra effort to teach on two different campuses and faculty who
are contemplating teaching at CaÃ±ada College
should consider that. Senator Brett Smith
asked for clarification on the funding of the program. AVP Whitaker
indicated that the funding for CaÃ±ada College
runs through 2004. After this date, we will have to look for alternative funding
sources. Senator Chen
shared his experience in setting up a program with College
and asked if the administration has considered similar relationships with
other community colleges? AVP Whitaker
that we have strong relationships with other community colleges in our service
area and that we will continue to build on those relationships. Both CaÃ±ada
Valley approached SFSU to set up programs that would serve both campuses.
outlined the importance of the SFSU and CaÃ±ada partnership in fulfilling the
local needs in Redwood
for teaching credential preparation for Latino students. He congratulated
and other SFSU faculty on the development of this outstanding program.
ITEM #4 - Recommendation from the Executive Committee: Resolution - Mitigating
the effects of the Budget Crises in 2003-2004 (and beyond).
introduced the proposed resolution on mitigating the effects of the budget
crisis. She pointed out the changes to the resolution that came as a result
of the Senate’s discussion of the resolution at out last meeting.
on the resolution, passed unanimously.
ITEM #5 -Recommendation from the Executive Committee: Resolution -Opposing
Certain Provisions of the U.S.A. Patriot
Act of 2001 and Endorsing Corrective Legislation.
introduced the proposed resolution on the USA Patriot Act of 2001. She indicated
two minor changes that came as a result of the Senate’s discussion of the
resolution at our last meeting.
on the resolution, passed without dissent.
ITEM #6—Recommendation from the Educational Policies council and the Graduate
Council: Approval of Proposed Changes to the M.A. Degree Program in History.
Chair of EPC indicated that both EPC and the Graduate Council unanimously
recommend approval of the proposed changes to the M.A. degree program in History.
The proposal comes forward from a joint graduate council, CRAC and Academic
Policy committee meeting. She indicated that during the meeting, the department
representative for the proposal, Richard Hoffman, gave an excellent rationale
for the addition of the new major field of Modern World History. Both of the
new courses, History 701 and History 850, have been approved. Those 2 courses
and 9 units of electives on advisement would comprise the new major field.
The department has had a minor field in Modern World History for 2 years and
now, with the addition of new faculty, would like to change the minor to a
major. The committee unanimously recommended this proposal. Richard Hoffman,
Chair of the Department of History, was present to answer questions. AVP Whitaker
indicated that the proposal is for an area of emphasis that is used for advising
purposed only and that it is not a concentration. She emphasized that the
Senate was not voting on a concentration or program. Senator Steier
asked if there was any intention in the future to add Asian or African emphasis.
outlined that the emphasis was developed partially from student demand and
at the present there is not the same demand for Asian or African fields. Senator
asked for clarification on the use of the terminology of “major field” versus
concentration. AVP Whitaker
indicated that the use of the term “major field” was acceptable as long as
it is clear that it is not a concentration.
Steier) to second reading
on the motion, passed unanimously.
ITEM #7—Recommendation from the Educational Policies council and the Graduate
Council: Approval of Proposed Changes to the M.A. Degree Program in Museum
Senator Amy Nichols, Chair of EPC indicated that
both EPC and the Graduate Council unanimously recommend approval of the proposed
changes to the Masters of Arts in Museum Studies. She indicated that the proposal
comes forward from a joint graduate council, CRAC and Academic Policy committee
meeting. During the meeting the department representative for the proposal,
Linda Ellis, gave an excellent rationale for the changes to the degree. To
summarize, the changes are to the core requirements and area emphasis. To
the core requirements, substitution of MS 860 for MS 794, for Collections
and Conservation, a prefix and number change of CLAR 850 to MS 740, substitution
of MS 760 for MS 750, and moving MS 794 from general requirement to Area Requirement.
In Museum Management, addition of MS 830 as a choice for this area. In regards
to changes in the Area of Emphasis, she indicate that the request is to increase
the number of electives from 3 to 4 courses and to specify the number of units
that can be taken inside vs. outside the major, and an increase of units for
the MA degree by 3 units. The joint committee unanimously recommended this
proposal. Dr. Edward Luby, Acting Director for Museum Studies Program, was
present to answer questions.
Chair Cherny indicated that since no one was seeking recognition the motion
was approved by consent.
ITEM #8—Recommendation from the Academic Policies Committee: Approval of Proposed
Changes to the University Policy on Written English Proficiency.
Midori McKeon, Chair of the Academic Policies
Committee introduced the proposed changes and indicated that the Committee
had unanimously recommended approval of the revision of the undergraduate
section of the University Policy on Written English Proficiency. She indicated
that throughout the academic year of 2002-2003, the APC had worked on the
revision of various sections of the University Policy on Written English Proficiency.
The proposed revision of the lower-division policy will bring the University
Policy on Written English Proficiency up to date. The proposed policy revision
includes no substantive changes. She outlined that the proposed revisions
reflect the following endeavors: (1) to update the course numbers and course
titles in the developmental English sequence for native speakers of English
that went into effect as of Spring 2003; (2) to supply more explanatory information
regarding the developmental English sequence for non-native speakers of English;
(3) to remove references to the CSU English Equivalency Examination (EEE),
Which is no longer administered; (4) to remove the list of the alternative
courses to English 214, because the list is obsolete and some of the courses
are now inactive. All current courses that satisfy the second-year English
composition requirement including alternative courses to English 214 are found
at the end of the English Department's course listing in the university's
Class Schedule, published each semester. Dr. Elise Earthman, Associate
Dean, College of Humanities, was available to answer questions.
Steier) to approved the changes
asked if it were not premature to be changing a policy when the Senate has
just recommend at its last meeting that the policy be review by off-campus
experts? Senator McKeon
indicted that the changes would help to clarify the present information and
clean up a lot of the language in the old policy. Senator Robert
ask for clarification for the need to put the course numbers in the policy.
indicated that the committee felt that the course numbers were stable enough
to be placed in the policy and that by placing the numbers there is would
help to clarify the sequence of course offerings. Elise Earthman,
Associate Dean, College of Humanities, indicated that the course number are
very stable and that this is the first time in 20 years that they had been
changed, and we don’t anticipate changing them again.
Meredith) to second reading
on the motion, passed without dissent.
ITEM #9—Recommendation from the Faculty Affairs Committee: Approval of Proposed
Changes to the Policy on Difference-In-Pay leaves.
Chair of Faculty Affairs Committee, introduced the proposed changes to the
policy on Difference-In-Pay leaves. She indicated that FAC had unanimously
recommended the approval of the proposed changes to the University policy
on Difference-in-Pay Leaves. Additionally, the need for these changes comes
from the requirement to bring University policy into compliance wit the collective
bargaining contract. The proposed changes have been adopted from the contract
asked for clarification of department’s HRTP committees in this process. Marilyn
acting Dean Faculty Affair indicated that the contract does not preclude department
HRTP committees from handling this item. Senator Houlberg
asked for clarification on who creates the criteria for Difference-in-Pay
Leaves. Senator Colvin
indicated that FAC views this matter as being handled at the department level
and that a university policy on criteria is not necessary. Senator McKeon
pointed out that the contract has some specific language about process under
Article 28.7. Senator Meredith
asked who would provide a statement on the effect of the Difference-in-Pay
Leave on department curriculum. Senator Turitz
indicated that Difference-in-Pay Leaves do not cost the university any money
since the difference between the person hired and the pay of the professor
are zero cost. Senator McKeon
indicted that it is department's responsibility to point out any impact that
the hiring of a part-time faculty member might have when a Difference-in-Pay
Leave is granted to at tenured faculty member. Senator Meredith
asserted that faculty are not interchangeable and in particular that releasing
a senior faculty member for a Difference-in-Pay Leave and then replacing them
with an equally qualified faculty member is very difficult. Any difference
in qualifications is also a cost to the university.
indicated the proposed changes will return to the Senate in two weeks.
ITEM #10—Recommendation from the Faculty Affairs Committee: Approval of proposed
changes to the Policy on Appointment of Tenure-Track Faculty Members.
Chair of Faculty Affairs Committee introduced the proposed changes to the
policy and indicated that FAC unanimously recommended approval of the proposed
changes to the University policy on hiring of tenure-track faculty members.
She indicated that the only part of the University policy being changed are
intended to address the situation of faculty being hired into an appointment
that are split between two or more departments. Senator Houlberg
asked for clarification on a curious blank section of the policy and asked
if something is missing? Senator Colvin
thanked Senator Houlberg for pointing out the blank section and indicated
that she would have an answer in two weeks. Senator Vaughn
indicated that the policy probably should be updated and the blank item may
refer to the old rather than the new faculty manual. Marilyn Verhey,
acting Dean Faculty Affairs, indicated that she would like to see the reference
to the Senate policy rather than the faculty manual.
Colvin) to adjourn
adjourned at 3:18 PM
Secretary to the Faculty