Minutes: May 10th, 2005

FINAL MEETING OF THE

2004-2005 ACADEMIC SENATE

TUESDAY, MAY 10, 2005

2:00 -

3:30 p.m.

CALL TO

ORDER: 2:15 p.m.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Chair Colvin announced that Daphne Stannard from the department of Nursing would be the Faculty Marshal

for graduation, and that Rick Houlberg would serve as her mentor.

State

Senator Yee announced that the

University Club would have a farewell celebration on Thursday May 12 from 4-6pm

with food and gifts. This would be a time to reminisce about good times in the

past, and the final day that the UC would be open was Friday June 3.  A farewell sale would follow.

Senator

Morishita announced that the

Stonestown purchase deal was nearly finished and would be formally announced

soon.

AGENDA ITEM #1—APPROVAL of the

AGENDA for MAY 10, 2005

Chair Colvin indicated there were some minor changes to the agenda; that

item four was coming in both first and second readings, and that item five was

arriving as a consent item from the Executive Committee.

Senator Chelberg pointed out a title change on item number five and that

four was arriving as a consent item from both CRAC and the Graduate Council.

Approved.

AGENDA ITEM #2—APPROVAL of the MINUTES for APRIL 26, 2005

Approved.

AGENDA ITEM #3—RECOMMENDATION from

the ACADEMIC POLICIES COMMITTEE: PROPOSED

ACADEMIC CALENDAR for 2006-2007, 2^ND Reading

Chair Colvin

spoke to the need to divide the question, by parsing the various independent

parts of the question into pieces that could be voted upon individually.

It was

moved to divide the question into four separate, distinct parts.

Meredith, Carrington m/s

Senator Meredith spoke as chair of APC and requested this

division. All four parts were independent, and could be voted up or down

without any impact on the rest of the item.

In

order, the first item involved treating the entire Fall

semester as a unit, with a number of interlinking parts.

The second

item concerned whether to include an advising day at the end of the semester.

The

third part involved the starting dates of the spring semester.

The

fourth part involved the timing of spring break.

There

were two issues, the first of which was making it clear that the motion to

divide was not debatable, but Meredith requested that the chair permit

questions. If any parts of the question were defeated, the item would need to

come back to APC for revision.

Vote to divide.

Unanimously approved.

Part I: Shall the Fall semester proceed as scheduled, with classes beginning

August 29, and containing a week-long Thanksgiving Day, with no advising day in

December?

Carrington, Fehrman m/s

Senator Chelberg confirmed

that the starting date was August 29.

Approved

by a majority of senators.

Part II: Shall spring semester

2007 not include an advising day?

Chelberg,

Fehrman m/s

Senator Gregory clarified

that the advising day at the end of the semester was for the following Spring semester.

Senator Velez noted that the

“sneak preview” documents often advertised advising day in their materials.

Senator Steier wanted to

make sure he knew what a “yes” vote meant.

Meredith responded

that by saying “yes,” advising day would be eliminated.

Approved with some dissent.

Part III: Shall spring semester

start on January 16, classes on the 18^th?

Meredith,

Carrington m/s

Meredith indicated

that starting on January 16^th permitted the semester to end a week

early, thus placing graduation the week before Memorial Day.

Senator Steier indicated

that he was speaking in self-interest, but he sought to keep his objection

principled. This proposal would not make it possible to do a decent short

winter session course. For 15 years now, summer session was three weeks, and

now there has been winnowing of courses. He personally needed the money for a

winter session class. Memorial Day, with the recent war in Iraq, may have

acquired a new meaning, and having graduation then could invest the day with

power, while separating the holiday from graduation might diminish the impact.

Senator M. Gonzalez noted that his department had core classes for their

majors during winter session and that this calendar would seriously impact his

department, preventing students from graduating.

Senator Carrington reminded senators that a campus survey of faculty,

mentioned at previous senate meetings, indicated that more than 60 percent of

the faculty thought that three-week courses could not be taught properly, so

that this proposed calendar was following the will of the faculty.

Senator Gregory deferred to incoming senator and visiting chair of the

English department, Jim Kohn.

Kohn observed

that students who take winter session classes, particularly students from

overseas, would find this a hardship in his department, and perhaps for others.

He urged retaining a viable winter session.

Senator Yee followed up on comments by Kohn and Gonzalez, suggesting that

students needed courses to graduate.

Senator Steier insisted his winter session courses were entirely

respectable.

Fourteen

in favor;

Twenty-six

opposed;

Two abstentions.

Chair Colvin indicated that APC will need to return with another calendar

proposal for the spring semester at the next senate meeting in the fall.

Part IV: Shall spring break be

scheduled for Friday March 23 through March 29 and be followed by Cesar Chavez

Day on Friday March 30?

Ulasewicz,

Fehrman m/s

Senator Ritter noted that

as much as a longer spring break would be welcome, it might diminish a very

important day.

Senator Axler spoke in

favor of the motion for academic reasons, large blocks of time freed up faculty

for research and other academic productivity. Cesar Chavez Day, if left as an

isolated day, might actually diminish its impact. The proposed plan would

permit Cesar Chavez Day to extend spring break.

Senator Smith apologized

for whispering earlier in the meeting when he had been questioning the

appropriateness of visitors speaking as senators. He appreciated Senator

Axler’s point, but both staff and students had indicated that having spring

break in proximity with Cesar Chavez Day would diminish the impact of that

holiday.

Senator Stowers noted that

based on local school spring break data, it made sense to tie the SFSU break to

theirs, beginning the week after Easter. Greater numbers of junior faculty had

children, and this would be better for families. She opposed the proposed

calendar.

Senator Ulasewicz supported

the proposed spring calendar, as the calendar for the upcoming year had already

scheduled spring break week in proximity to Cesar Chavez Day. She thought this

might do something to elevate the image of Cesar Chavez Day. Secondly, while

she understood the value of the day, her own students found ways to extend the

break anyway.

Senator Chelberg echoed the

last speaker’s thoughts. A large number of people took spring break and then

extended the break with Cesar Chavez Day. If the campus wanted to celebrate

this day, there needed to be separate activities. Campus was closed on Cesar

Chavez Day anyway.

Senator Bernard-Powers

thought this looked like an extended break. Campus generally clears out on

Friday and few faculty members teach on Friday anyway. She did not view it as

an extra day, but rather it appeared to be a spring break with Cesar Chavez Day

built in.

Senator Langbort

did not see how this vote could be handled without knowing what dates the

semester had for a beginning and an end.

Colvin indicated

that only the spring break was under discussion.

Senator Smith appreciated

Chelberg’s comments. He observed that there were varied perspectives on the

holiday and that it depended on whom one talked to.

Senator Palmer expressed

opposition, noting that a third of his department had children, making it hard

to reschedule to teach.

Senator Chelberg noted that

there were no campus activities on Cesar Chavez Day.

Senator Chen wanted the

senate to consider another option.

Chair Colvin responded that

that was not possible, but that the motion called for a straight up-or-down

vote on spring break.

Senator Chen opposed the

proposed calendar.

Voting:

Eighteen in favor.

Twenty-three

opposed.

One abstention.

Chair Colvin indicated that APC will need to return with another calendar

proposal for the spring semester at the next senate meeting in the fall.

AGENDA ITEM #4—RECOMMENDATION from

the CURRICULUM REVIEW & APPROVAL COMMITTEE and the GRADUATE COUNCIL:

PROPOSED REVISION to the CLINICAL LAB SCIENCE INTERNSHIP

Nichols, Steier m/s

Senator

and CRAC chair Nichols indicated that this was a consent item from both committees, and was an

outcome of the suspension of the program voted on in the fall. The committee

had reviewed the proposal, and had addressed administrative issues raised. Dean

Hallum, Linda Blackwood, and Linda Wanek were present to answer questions.

Graduate

Dean Hallum noted that the budget had provided the opportunity to reposition the

program and move it to HHS. The program had some skill in moving students

between the regular university and internships, and was also familiar with

licensing requirements, and health arrangements. It was officially designated

as a certificate program. It had raised its standards, specifically in level

one and level two writing, and had the support of various local councils. An

articulation arrangement existed between CityCollege

and our biological program courses. Wanek, in her earlier career, was familiar

with clinical issues.

Senator Yee spoke

in favor of the revisions. Hallum and she had taken time for a conference at Sacramento where they had

heard a presentation form graduate students on the program, and it looked like

they had done a good job realigning the program and getting on track as quickly

as possible.

Senator

and CRAC member Boyle commended the committee on hard work and for revitalizing the

certificate program.

Senator Axler spoke

to the issue of suspension for the program, stating that this proposal did not

clear up this issue, which had surfaced since the director had resigned and

courses could not be offered. This proposal would not help, but was rather a

program for a new curriculum. He hoped it would pass but would abstain. As for

course renumbering, it appeared to be merely a re-labeling, but in fact the

courses were quite different. This might be confusing, but was perhaps not a

big deal. He would abstain, due to questions related to whether this is the

best thing for the campus to be doing.

Nichols

responded that there was no guideline or policy

about bringing programs out of suspension.

Chair Colvin stated

that the senate was not discussing the suspension of the program, only the

proposal at hand.

Moved to

second reading.

Approved

with one abstention.

AGENDA ITEM #5—RECOMMENDATION from

the STANDING COMMITTEE CHAIRS: RESOLUTION THANKING & COMMENDING DEPARTING

2004-2005 ACADEMIC SENATORS, SENATE LEADERSHIP AND PROFESSIONAL VALUES

Palmer, Chelberg m/s/p

Senator Stowers had

a question about the names of outgoing senators listed.

Chair Colvin

indicated that the names were of those senators whose terms were ending, but

that some senators would be continuing in a second term.

Senator Chelberg

noted that this item was coming via the standing committee chairs.

Senator Meredith

read the resolution.

Senator Steier

had some difficulty with the word “modeling” which for some reason always

suggested a fashion runway for him, and suggested instead that a word such as

“embody” might be better employed in the document.

Senator Chelberg

asked that certain names be added to the list of departing senators.

Vice-chair

Williams thanked senators for their support this year, during a difficult time. He

indicated that the senate leaders had tried very hard to take a faculty

advocacy role, and appreciated the frank discussion the senate engaged in. 

Secretary

Fielden noted that as “keeper of the words” of the senate, he especially

appreciated the reasoned discussion that characterized the senate sessions in

the past year, a year unusually difficult.

Chair Colvin

expressed her deep thanks to the senate.

Return

in five minutes, 3:25.

AGENDA

ITEM #6—ADJOURNMENT— 3:18 p.m.