of September 9, 1997
The Academic Senate was called to order by Chair Mark Phillips at 2:10 p.m.
Senate Members Present:
Haw, Mary Ann
La Belle, Thomas
Warren, Mary Ann
Wong, Yim Yu
Senate Members Absent: Wilkinson, Nancy(exc.); Choo, Freddie;
Blank, Mark; Duke, Jerry(exc.); Hammett, Jennifer; Gonzales, Angela; Smith,
Erna; Lyles, Lois; Kelley, James(exc.); Scoble, Don(exc.); Corrigan, Robert(exc.);
Chang, Paul(exc.); Nicholson, Joel; Collier, James(exc.); Mallare, Marie.
Senate Interns Present: Avant, Anna.
Guests: H. Matson, S. Shimanoff, G. Whitaker, D. Schafer, J.
Kassiola, P. Mendez.
Announcements and Report
- Chair Phillips felt that some of the most important items for the Senate
to focus on are the Baccalaureate Review, Cornerstones, the
CUSP process, revising the PSSI policy, the improvement
of assessment processes, and efforts to improve human/cross-cultural
relations on campus.
- Members of the 1997-98 Executive Committee - Rick Houlberg, Vice
Chair; Bonnie Homan, Secretary; Penelope Warren and Helen
Gillotte, members at-large; Helen Goldsmith, Academic Policies
Committee Chair; Jerry Duke, Academic Program Review Committee Chair;
Darlene Yee, Curriculum Review and Approval Committee Chair; Marlon
Hom, Faculty Affairs Committee Chair; and Dawn Terrell, Student
Affairs Committee Chair.
- Amy Shouse is the Associated Students Undergraduate representative
to the Senate.
- Thank you to the SFSU Handbell Choir, under the direction
of Caroline Harnly, for their performance prior to the Opening Faculty
- The PSSI policy which was distributed should have been labeled
Academic Senate Policy as amended by the President. Some of the changes
were done in consultation with the Executive Committee and others were made
at the President's discretion.
Agenda Item #1 - Approval of Agenda for September 9, 1997
M/S/P (Gillotte, Yee) to amend the agenda to change Agenda Item #3
to #3a and add Agenda Item #3b - Resolution Regarding Academic Qualifications
for the New CSU Chancellor.
The agenda was approved as amended.
Agenda Item #2 - Approval of Minutes for Meeting of May 13, 1997
Two sets of minutes were considered (one for the 'old' Senate and one for
the 'new' Senate). Both sets of minutes were approved as printed.
Agenda Item #3a - Resolution Calling on CSU Trustees to Provide Broader
Faculty Representation on the Search Committee for Chancellor
Houlberg explained that other campuses are also passing resolutions
to address this issue. He felt that while the one faculty member, Bernie Goldstein,
will represent the faculty well, the issues are larger than one faculty member
can effectively represent.
As there was no one seeking debate, M/S/P (Homan, Cherny) to move to
Hammerstrom explained that in the past Chancellor search processes
there have been at least two faculty members to represent the approximately
30,000 faculty members in the CSU. He felt that it is important that the Statewide
Senate have strong support on this issue from the campuses. He hoped that the
SFSU would strongly support this resolution.
M/S/P (Houlberg, Gillotte) to close debate. The vote was taken and
the resolution passed unanimously.
Agenda Item #3b - Resolution Regarding Academic Qualifications for the
New CSU Chancellor
Houlberg said that the connection between the person who will be successful
in this search and a person's academic experience and background has been lessened
in favor of a business background. While acknowledging that the CSU is a business,
it is a unique business and the Chancellor should be able to understand an academic
Phillips felt that this resolution, in conjunction with resolutions
from other CSU campus senates and the Statewide Academic Senate could place
productive pressure on the search committee so that these issues are addressed
when the selection of a Chancellor is made. Phillips also felt that the academic
and professional backgrounds of the candidates should play a significant role
in the selection process.
Hammerstrom stated that when Munitz was selected Chancellor, the language
used in the position description included that the successful candidate should
have academic credentials sufficient to obtain tenure and promotion on a CSU
campus. That language has been removed and replaced with the language in the
second whereas clause in the resolution. He felt that the resolution addresses
M/S/P (Bernstein, Fehrman) to move to second reading. As there was
no one seeking debate, M/S/P (Woo, Gillotte) to close debate. The vote
was taken and the resolution passed unanimously.
Phillips stated that copies of both resolutions will be forwarded to
the Statewide Academic Senate and the Board of Trustees.
Agenda Item #4 - Elections
All University Teacher Education Committee
Susan Fox-Wolfgramm/Management submitted her name for consideration. As there
were no nominations from the floor, M/S/P(P. Warren/Houlberg) to close
nominations and elect Susan Fox-Wolfgramm by acclamation.
Darlene Yee/Gerontology submitted her name for consideration. As there were
no nominations from the floor, M/S/P(Barnes/M.A. Warren) to close nominations
and elect Darlene Yee by acclamation.
Board of Appeals and Review
Herb Kaplan/BECA, Paul Mendez/E.O.P., and Wolf Stadler/Engineering submitted
their names for consideration.. M/S/P(Houlberg/Fehrman) to close nominations.
The vote was taken and Herb Kaplan and Paul Mendez were elected
Agenda Item #5 - Report from Vice President La Belle
La Belle reported on the challenges and constraints that he felt SFSU
is facing. He felt that one external pressure is the remediation issue of selecting
students into the institution. The ELM and EPT are in place now and next fall
the critical thinking and speech communication pieces will be in place. The
campus has been getting the word out to high schools and community colleges
that the policy has been implemented. He felt that it does effect access, and
it will be studied to determine if it differentially effects ethnic groups.
La Belle felt that the Chancellor's replacement will have a major effect on
the system. He agreed with the quote in the newspaper by Pat Callan that Munitz
was very good as an external person, good on the political side, with the Trustees
and on economic negotiations, but that Munitz missed the academic piece with
a lack of concern or interest in the role of faculty, curricula, and academic
programs. La Belle said that his preference would be for the next Chancellor
to have a better balance and to sell the Legislature and the Trustees on the
importance of academic programs and the integrity of what the university is
He also felt that some dimensions of Cornerstones could have potential impact
on SFSU and used the potential linking of academic program outcomes to budget
as an example.
WASC reaccreditation should occur at the turn of the century. Since several
years of data on the effectiveness of programs are needed for the accreditation
process, this is being worked on now. He felt that an inadequate budget will
continue to be a major constraint. Technology was another constraint. Some of
the issues that La Belle identified included the Virtual University, distance
education, and the use of technology in the classroom. He felt that SFSU is
trying to get some experience, to experiment, and to take some initiative in
the use of technology for instruction. He also felt that this campus is very
far ahead in the infrastructure, up-dating the technology in classrooms, and
preparing faculty on the use of technology in the more traditional mode. However,
distance learning will need to have continuing investment on this campus. CUSP
will become a challenge again, he said, as the implementation plan for CUSP,
now called CRISP, moves forward.
Enrollment was a challenge this fall. Last year, if ELM and EPT were implemented,
about 850 students would not have been permitted to enter the university. This
fall, about 1600 students originally would not have been admitted if they had
not taken care of the requirement. He gave a great deal of credit to Executive
Direct of Enrollment Planning & Management Tom Rudder, Vice President for
Student Affairs Penny Saffold, and their colleagues who dealt with this situation
very appropriately. He felt that enrollment this fall is now relatively stable.
Another enrollment issue is the Master Plan enrollment cap at 20,000 FTEs.
If this goes forward as currently planned, there will be no new income streams
from enrollment growth. That means, that we would be in a reallocation mode,
moving money between colleges and programs, to meet student demand. La Belle
felt that SFSU needs to be looking at how to develop new income streams. These
new income streams may involve Extended Learning and Community Colleges to find
La Belle also felt that SFSU has some opportunities such as capital
investment. Several firms have approached the University about investing in
buildings downtown, particularly South of Market Street. Public/private partnerships
are also being explored.
In the Curricular and Program area, the need to work on program outcomes and
assessment is a priority. He felt that each program will need to have faculty
talk about outcomes and select from an array of tools to collect information
from students about what they've learned. The results of these assessments will
be used to enhance and improve programs. He felt that CUSP, Cornerstones, and
WASC all address this issue.
One experiment on alternative income streams is called the Weekend College.
It will be offered through the College of Extended Learning starting in the
spring and it will offer classes on Friday evenings, Saturdays and potentially
on Sundays. This year, the College of Business offers courses on Saturdays and
the demand is very high. He felt that expanding the program and sharing that
income stream back through the colleges offers new opportunities.
La Belle identified what he calls Academic Juggernauts, some of which
will need to be worked on by the Academic Senate. Some of those issues include
passing of JEPET as a graduation requirement, how long a student can be on academic
probation, repeating courses, the maximum number of units a student may complete,
standardizing withdrawals, when the declaration of a major should occur and
who should be involved, and the uses of the GET retest. CUSP implementation
was the final program/curricular issue he discussed. He felt that 99% of the
CUSP recommendations fall into the academic arena. One budget priority is to
prepare for the eventuality for cap of enrollment in the master plan. This involves
finding alternatives for new markets while maintaining the integrity of programs
and residency requirement.
The President's initiative to convert some lecturer positions to tenure-track
positions will go forward, La Belle felt. Currently, if you convert a lecturer
FTE (10 or 11 courses) to tenure-track, approximately 1/3 of the instructional
resources would be lost to the department. The plan is to keep instructional
resources constant by taking 2/3 of the resources from the college and 1/3 from
the centralized administration. He felt that the university would be hiring
about 100 tenure-track faculty over the next 5 years and 78 will be associated
with the conversion plan. La Belle said that 18 such hires will be effective
next fall and the President has agreed to make the dollars available to make
this happen. The budget discussion about this plan includes how the moneys will
be allocated, for example for shoring up programs or to build program strength.
One faculty issue is the evaluation of teaching effectiveness. BSS is experimenting
with a new evaluation instrument. There are currently many instruments used
on campus, however there has been no report on the validity or reliability of
these instruments. An All-Campus committee is working to see if each college
can reduce the number of instruments used this year and to eventually move to
a flexible instrument that could be used across colleges.
Concerning post tenure review, La Belle presented graphs showing current SFSU
tenure/tenure-track faculty by rank. The graph showed that 66% of full professors
are at the top step and 85-90% of faculty on this campus are tenured. These
numbers are fairly consistent across colleges. He felt that this is not a good
model for the institution of the future. One reason may be that positions are
advertised as a range from assistant to full professor and assistant professor
salaries are not always high enough to be competitive. If the candidates include
people qualified for full professor, it is often difficult for search committees
to choose the less experienced person and/or the person with fewer publications.
To help deal with this, the assistant professor salary range is now open and
therefore more competitive and the need for post tenure review is being explored.
The CSU system is suggesting that they may want to manage money system-wide
for faculty development, so that as faculty retire, some of the money is swept
back into the system for faculty development. La Belle has asked the deans to
restrict hiring to the assistant professor level unless there is a substantive
reason to hire at a higher level. This year, the campus will be celebrating
teaching. The effort is to bring more attention to teaching both symbolically
Barnes asked about the statistics on full professors and whether any
analysis was done on how many will be around 5 years from now. La Belle replied
that there will be turnover, but there will be more turnover system-wide than
on this campus. Retirement age on this campus is slightly higher than the national
average and there are no incentive packages to manipulate retirement, so it
is not known how much turnover will occur. The system is looking at turnover
in terms of dollar reinvestment.
Hammerstrom felt that access is also likely to become a problem. Several
other campuses are dealing with impaction and Hammerstrom wondered if there
had been any discussion about impaction on this campus so that the debate might
begin before the need becomes too excessive. La Belle replied that it
has been talked about at the graduate level since that is likely to be the area
of most growth. At the undergraduate level, a number of departments have instituted
restricted registration, using touch tone to channel students. One problem with
that is equity. More academic prerequisites are being included as another means
to shape enrollment patterns. Nursing, Social Work, and BECA have for some time
selected students based on specific criteria.
Harnly stated that support services should be considered when weekend
courses are considered since this effects the Library, AV, Academic Computing
and other support services. La Belle agreed that those student services
need to be available and the issues should be looked at. La Belle appreciated
the issues being raised.
Agenda Item #6 - Report from Statewide Senators
Phillips introduced Statewide Senators Eunice Aaron, Robert
Cherny, and Gary Hammerstrom. Hammerstrom reported that Aaron
serves on the Faculty Affairs Committee, Cherny on the Academic Affairs Committee,
and Hammerstrom on the Fiscal and Governmental Affairs Committee.
Cherny reported on the May meeting of the Statewide Academic Senate.
He stated that policy changes were approved concerning new degree program review
and approval. A resolution on setting Senate priorities on funding was approved.
Aaron, Cherny and Hammerstrom introduced an amendment to add as a priority reducing
the differences that exist among the large campuses for per-student funding.
This resolution was not approved but they hope to deal with it again during
the coming year.
A resolution dealing with an extension of an experimental program at Sonoma
State concerning an experimental admissions policy will return for more discussion.
Cherny reported that Sonoma had not declared impaction but had embarked
on an experiment to "make themselves into a public ivy" and select
students based on "vaguely defined criteria." He felt that CSU campuses
have an obligation to accept students based on common criteria and if one campus
can alter the criteria, it can impact the rest of the system. He said, as an
example, that if one campus finds that they no longer need to offer remediation,
the other campuses may have to offer more remediation. Cherny stated that if
a campus can restrict enrollment, that campus can have more dollars per student,
so controlling enrollment is one way of increasing income. The Academic Affairs
Committee asked the Chancellor not to approve the continuation of the experiment
until results of the experiment are available to justify continuing.
Aaron reported that she is on the Faculty Affairs Committee, the CPEC
Educational Equity Advisory Committee, and the Pre-Doctoral Advisory Committee.
She reported on the FAC work plan for the year, which is always subject to revision.
Dan Whitney (SDSU) is the new chair of this committee. The committee attempted
to represent the faculty's position concerning faculty representation on the
CSU Chancellor Search Committee. FAC plans to continue in this effort. An announcement
may be made October 1 concerning the "short list" of Chancellor candidates.
FAC is also concerned with faculty flow, the ratio of full-time to part-time
faculty including full-time lecturers. Since many faculty recognize that the
strength of the system is not based on a weakened lecturer faculty, FAC is working
on revised language concerning faculty flow. The ratio of courses taught by
the two groups of instructors will also be discussed. Aaron reported that, according
to the committee chair, the discussion will begin with providing a fair assessment
of the role and value of lecturers to the CSU, pointing out that the CSU cannot
survive without them. Aaron felt that without lecturers, the lives of tenure/tenure-track
faculty would be dramatically different and not for the better.
Cornerstones will be discussed this year. Since there is a growing concern
and dissatisfaction at the Statewide Academic Senate over merit pay and PSSIs,
FAC is approaching the issue assuming that they can effect change. Concerning
faculty development, FAC fought taking money from retirement and putting it
into a centralized technology fund. Faculty web site charges will be discussed.
Academic productivity is being discussed and FAC will bring a faculty perspective
to this discussion. Aaron said that many campuses feel similarly about these
Attached to a letter to campus presidents about technology issues, from the
business partners, was a report on whether or not to consolidate data collection
centers in the system. Aaron questioned what happens to the people working in
the data centers if they are consolidated.
Cherny reported on the Academic Affairs Committee agenda for the year.
The California Virtual University is on the agenda. International Programs will
have a new director and the Center on Globalization will report to AAC. The
Teacher Preparation Report, Cornerstones and the Baccalaureate Review will also
be agendized. Cherny further reported that he also serves on the Academic Council
for International Programs and the Merit Pay Task Force. On October 7, he will
report to the SFSU Academic Senate concerning the Merit Pay Task Force.
Hammerstrom reported that he is on the Fiscal and Governmental Affairs
Committee, the Admissions Advisory Council and the Advisory Board for the Institute
for Teaching and Learning. A resolution was presented in first reading concerning
changes in the high school preparatory pattern for entering freshmen. The proposal
was to add a second course in the Social Sciences (which is currently a high
school graduation requirement) and to add a second course in laboratory sciences.
He felt that this was an attempt to get UC to recognize CSU visual and performing
arts requirements and to make some similarity between two admissions requirements.
If UC adopts the visual and performing arts requirement and CSU adds the above
2 courses, the requirements would then be the same for both systems.
The Fiscal and Governmental Affairs Committee monitors the budget preparation
process and legislation affecting the CSU. On his personal agenda, Hammerstrom
reported that attempts to make equity in campus funding is a priority. If new
students are funded at the marginal cost rather than the average cost, then
the average funding per student decreases. At present, SFSU has the lowest allocation
of dollars per FTE in the system and there is about a $2000 gap between the
highest average and the lowest average. He also felt that if the perception
within the CSU is that you lose money through growth, that is counter productive
since the system has to grow.
M.A. Warren asked which campus had the highest funding per student.
Hammerstrom replied that probably Monterey Bay since they are newest. Maritime
Academy is next highest. If you compare the larger campuses, SDSU is highest
and is over $1000 higher than SFSU which is the lowest.
Agenda Item #7 - The Cornerstones Report
Chair Phillips introduced this item by stating that this is part of
the CSU system-wide strategic planning effort. He felt that differentiating
between the text and the subtext is important. He felt that it is politically
driven by the populace and the legislature and it is substantively driven by
changes socially and technologically. A campus response to the first Cornerstones
report was sent in May. Based on responses from all campuses, revisions were
made in the Principles of Cornerstones, but not the larger document.
The SFSU Cornerstones task force will meet in early October. SFSU has requested
an ambassadorial Cornerstones group to visit campus and the October 21 Senate
meeting. Our campus representative to Cornerstones include Tom Ehrlich,
Brian Murphy, Gary Hammerstrom, Peter Dewees, and Bernie Goldstein. Another
response to the Cornerstones Report is due in November.
Phillips identified what he considered to be the key issues: allocation
of funds and what it is tied to; funding between large and small campuses and
centralized versus decentralized decision-making; graduate fee differential
and whether it is uniform or programmatic. He felt that learning assessment,
and means of assessment other than course work, could diminish the faculty role
or faculty numbers. However, alternative means of assessment are needed. The
relationship between extended learning and the "regular university"
is another key issue as well as graduate programs funding and support versus
undergraduate funding and support.
Hammerstrom, as the only member of the Cornerstones group who was present,
felt that the real problem right now is difference between text and subtext.
He said that some people wondered whether the agenda was well established before
this began and the process was going in that direction whether we want it or
not. He felt that some Cornerstones members feel that they might have been used.
As an example, his task force originally suggested that as faculty retire, some
part of funds get left with the department so that departments might have incentive
to hire junior faculty and use any left over money for travel or faculty development.
That money may now be swept up centrally. To further illustrate his point, he
discussed the use of learning assessment as a way to improve programs. His task
force suggested that assessment should be used to improve programs, but now
assessment might be tied to funding and accountability. He urged the Senate
to read the text as if reading it for the first time as there have been substantial
changes in the document since last fall.
Barnes asked Phillips to explain faculty renewal. Phillips deferred
to Hammerstrom who explained that throughout the CSU there is a large number
of top step full professors who will be retiring in the next 5-10 years. If
those faculty are replaced by assistant or associate professors, there could
be some cost savings. Simply put, that funding could be used to promote faculty
Houlberg explained that if there is a dollar savings, one plan was
to use the money for technology to reduce instructional costs. Two of the problems
that were pointed out were that there was no budget for new hires and that the
technology costs have not been identified. He felt that there is no indication
that technology will save money because no one has done the studies yet.
Haw asked to whom the feedback should go. Phillips responded to direct
the feedback to him and he will feed it into the process. Phillips stated that
we can attempt to impact the process through written responses. Also, informally
working with the campus representatives to Cornerstones, it may be possible
to differentiate the text and subtext.
The Senate was adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
Secretary to the Faculty