Minutes: December 1st, 1998

SFSU Academic Senate

Minutes of December 1, 1998

The Academic Senate was called to order by Chair Mark Phillips at 2:10 p.m.

Senate Members Present:

Aaron, Eunice; Bartscher, Patricia; Bernstein, Marian; Cancino, Herlinda; Cherny,

Robert; Consoli, Andres; Contreras, Rey; Craig, JoAnn; Cullers, Susan; Duke,

Jerry; Eisman, Gerald; Elia, John; Fehrman, Ken; Ferretti, Charlotte; Ganji,

Vijay; Goldsmith, Helen; Graham, Michael; Graham, Minnie; Gregory, Jan; Harnly,

Caroline; Hom, Marlon; Hu, Sung; Jenkins, Lee; Jerris, Scott; Johnson, Dane;

Kelley, James; La Belle, Thomas; Moss, Joanna; Oñate, Abdiel; Phillips,

Mark; Raggio, Marcia; Shapiro, Jerald; Shrivastava, Vinay; Simeon, Roblyn; Smith,

Miriam; Strong, Rob; Tarakji, Ghassan; Terrell, Dawn; Turitz, Mitch; Valledares,

Juan; Vega, Sandra; Vaughn, Pamela; Verhey, Marilyn; Wade, Patricia; Warren,

Mary Anne; Wong, Alfred; Zieff, Susan; Zoloth-Dorfman, Laurie.

Senate Members Absent: Swanson, Deborah(exc.); Fielden, Ned;

Choo, Freddie; Chen, Yu-Charn(exc.); Hammett, Jennifer(exc.); Gonzales, Angela;

Barnes, Paul(exc.); Warren, Penelope(exc.); Flowers, Will(exc.); Scoble, Don(exc.);

Collier, James; Corrigan, Robert(exc.); Montenegro, Ricardo.

Senate Interns Present: Happy Dayleg, Marvin Dumon

Guests: D. Schafer, M. Kasdan, R. Maghroori, E. Williams, J.

Randolph, G. Whitaker, J. Volkert, J. Middlebrook, D. Zingale, S. Taylor, J.

Kassiola, J. Davis, M. Potepan, G. Manning, M. Love.

Announcements and Report

Chair’s Report

  • CSU Trustee Anthony Vitti will be meeting with the Academic Senate

    Executive Committee on December 6.

  • David Spence, CSU Vice-President for Academic Affairs, will visit on

    Dec. 9-10, meeting with both the Senate Executive Committee and the Cornerstones

    Task Force. Any comments on the draft implementation plan for Cornerstones

    should be turned in to the Executive Committee, members of the Cornerstones

    Task Force, or department chairs.

Agenda Item #1 - Approval of Agenda for Meeting of December 1, 1998

M/S/P (Vaughn, Fehrman) to table Agenda Item #12, the proposed revisions

to A.S. Policy F87-32, Graduate Student Award for Distinguished Achievement,

for further consultation.

The agenda was approved as amended.

Agenda Item #2 - Approval of Minutes for Meeting of November 17, 1998

The minutes were approved as printed.

Agenda Item #3 - Report from Statewide Senators

Robert Cherny briefly discussed the CSU Academic Conference and

suggested that we review the remarks given by Chancellor Charles Reed.

Phillips added that it was a useful conference, and, although it was not on

the agenda formally, Cornerstones was the subtext.

Agenda Item #4 - Proposed Policy and Guidelines for Offering Existing SFSU

Degrees via College of Extended Learning

Helen Goldsmith, chair of the Academic Policies Committee, introduced

the proposed policy and guidelines for offering existing SFSU degrees via College

of Extended Learning, which returned to the Senate in second reading. Goldsmith

stated that in response to concerns raised at the November 17 Senate meeting

and based on discussions with Bob Cherny and CFA leaders Margo Kasdan, Tim Sampson,

and Jan Gregory, APC unanimously agreed to the friendly amendments included

in the CEL policy attached to today's agenda, which are underlined. The policy

fills a void--many programs are desirous of offering programs through CEL and

there are currently no control mechanisms on what gets offered and how. The

reexamination provision allows us to address any problems that were not foreseen

in the development of this policy. Goldsmith reiterated that it is not intended

that every department or program be involved. She added that Cherny's additional

amendments distributed on the floor today would be considered friendly as well.

With regard to the amendments, the primary changes have to do with faculty,

regarding personnel policy. There are also changes to make sure that quality

is addressed and the reexamination, so that if there are problems, they will

be addressed.

Phillips urged the Senate to approve the policy as amended because it

is a very good policy. He said that if this policy is not passed today, it will

come back to the Senate sometime in February, which means we will not have a

policy until mid-spring. CEL has the power and right to offer programs, and

they will do so in the absence of any policy that comes from the faculty and

provides guidelines, limitations, and safeguards.

Minnie Graham, lecturer in the Communicative Disorders Program within

the Department of Special Education for 18 years, spoke in favor of the proposed

policy based on the experience of the Communicative Disorders master's degree

program in Guam. In setting up and administering this unique project, guidelines

such as those offered in the CEL document would have been helpful. Graham went

on to describe the program, explaining who the students were, why they could

not attend our campus, the benefits for the students and faculty, as well as

other details of the program. Her description addressed many of the concerns

faculty have raised about CEL offering existing degrees, and she reiterated

that guidelines need to be in place for future projects that tie in to SFSU's

mission statement of community outreach.

Donna Schafer, Associate Dean of the Graduate Division, concurred with

those who have spoke in favor of the proposed policy, sharing a perspective

gained from operating without a policy. Given the 12-unit rule and without an

explicit policy regarding CEL, programs are limited in flexibility to meld CEL

and regular graduate units for a cohort of students. Faculty are forced to submit

a series of waivers to permit those students to enroll, and there is little

guidance for someone to decide on waivers and exceptions. Schafer concluded

that we should be offering degrees through a mechanism that has been subjected

to scrutiny and approval of the faculty according to criteria and procedures

upon which the faculty has agreed rather than through waivers and exceptions

that require administrative action.

Margo Kasdan commented that the CFA sees this as a contracting-out situation,

which makes this policy subject to collective bargaining. She suggested sending

it back to committee.

Patricia Bartscher, University Counsel, responded to concerns raised

by CFA and other faculty members. CEL is clearly authorized to offer these programs

and the policies governing the program content is what is important for the

Academic Senate to review. She added that as she read the amendments, they suggest

that faculty could only teach on a release-time basis, which limits faculty

member ability for extra income.

Bartscher commented further on the amendment to the section entitled Faculty

that begins "All faculty personnel policies and procedures." Given that you

cannot expand on what the collective bargaining agreement allows for policies,

practices, and procedures, terms and conditions of employment, including benefits,

careful consideration and entitlement for lecturers, nor can you authorize increase

of compensation that is different from CBA for tenure/tenure-track faculty,

the only way to interpret this language is that the people would teach on a

release-time basis.

Tom La Belle asked if Cherny intended it that way as part of his amendment,

adding that he could not support it if this is the interpretation of the counsel.

Cherny commented that such legal advice goes to the Provost, and the

Provost makes decisions based on that advice. Cherny said that we permit faculty

to do overloads, and he did not prohibit that in his amendments. With regard

to benefits, that word does not appear anywhere in his amendments.

Phillips provided a point of information: If there is a question regarding

legality, there is no contesting; that is, if we were to pass this as amended

by Cherny and, after close examination, the decision was that this was indeed

a violation of the contract, the President can make changes based on advice

of counsel before the policy is signed.

Julian Randolph raised questions regarding parts of the document with

which he has major problems. He wondered if making units earned in such programs

resident units can be done by fiat. The issue of impact seems to be contradictory

in the proposal. There must be a distinction between regular continuing education

and special sessions. Randolph also wondered how one offers a full degree through

CEL. He concluded that he objected most strenuously to the possibility that

there might be two classes of students based on what they can afford.

Goldsmith addressed the concept of the full degree through CEL, pointing out

that most of the programs that are interested right now are graduate programs

and credentials. The reality is that if undergraduate programs were to be offered

through CEL it would probably be upper-division only with very specific requirements.

Jo Volkert, Associate Dean of the College of Extended Learning, responded

to the issue of residence credit. It is the definition of special sessions that

it does earn resident credit and is what we do in summer and winter.

M/S/P (Vaughn, Fehrman) to close debate.

Sandra Vega called for a roll call vote on the proposed policy (as printed

in the agenda with friendly amendments from Cherny).

The following Senators voted yes: Eunice Aaron, Patricia Bartscher,

Marian Bernstein, Herlinda Cancino, Robert Cherny, Andres Consoli, Rey Contreras,

JoAnn Craig, Jerry Duke, Gerald Eisman, John Elia, Ken Fehrman, Charlotte Ferretti,

Vijay Ganji, Helen Goldsmith, Michael Graham, Minnie Graham, Caroline Harnly,

Sung Hu, Lee Jenkins, Scott Jerris, Dane Johnson, James Kelley, Thomas La Belle,

Joanna Moss, Abdiel Oñate, Mark Phillips, Marcia Raggio, Jerald Shapiro,

Vinay Shrivastava, Roblyn Simeon, Rob Strong, Dawn Terrell, Ghassan Tarakji,

Juan Valladares, Pamela Vaughn, Marilyn Verhey, Patricia Wade, Mary Ann Warren,

Alfred Wong, Susan Zieff.

The following Senators voted no: Jan Gregory, Miriam Smith, Sandra Vega.

The following Senators abstained: Marlon Hom, Mitch Turitz, Laurie Zoloth-Dorfman.

The policy passed with a vote of 40 yes, 3 no, 3 abstentions. (To view

this policy, click here.)

Agenda Item #5 - Proposed Undergraduate Certificate Program in Youth and Human

Service Nonprofit Agency Administration

CRAC Chair Alfred Wong introduced the College of Health and Human Services

proposed undergraduate certificate program in Youth and Human Service Nonprofit

Agency Administration, a field where the demand for candidates to fill entry-level

professional positions far exceeds the supply of qualified candidates.

M/S/P (Vaughn, Ferhman) to second reading.

M/S/P (Ferhman, Vaughn) to close debate.

The vote was taken and the item passed unanimously.

Agenda Item #6 - Proposed Revision to the Bachelor of Arts in Economics

CRAC Chair Wong introduced the Department of Economics proposal to add

Econ 610 to the core course requirements. Econ 610 is the new capstone course

and an integral part of the department's Student Learning Outcomes Assessment


Cherny asked if they would require additional resources to make this

change. Economics Department chair Michael Potepan answered that with

160 majors, more resources will be needed to staff the anticipated three sections.

M/S/P (Kelley/Vaughn) to second reading.

M/S/P (Vaughn, Cherny) to close debate.

The vote was taken and the item passed unanimously.

Agenda Item #7 - Proposed Revision to the Bachelor of Science in Business Administration

CRAC Chair Wong introduced the College of Business proposal to reduce

the total number of units for the Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration

from 130 to 127.

Marvin Dumon asked which part of the program has one less class in this

proposed policy. Associate Dean of Business Gerry Manning answered that

there are no classes that are being removed; the policy changes nothing in terms

of courses if students plan their program carefully.

M/S/P (Vaughn, Ferhrman) to second reading.

M/S/P (Ferhman, Kelley) to close debate.

The vote was taken and the item passed unanimously.

Agenda Item #8 - Proposed Revision to the Bachelor of Science in Hospitality


CRAC Chair Wong introduced the College of Business proposal to reduce

the total number of units for the Bachelor of Science degree in Hospitality

Management from 132 to 128.

Vaughn asked if the rationale and results are the same for this proposal

as for the previous one. Dean Manning replied in the affirmative.

Dumon expressed concern about the reduction in units, suggesting that

it is a strength to require more units.

M/S/P (Fehrman, Kelley) to second reading.

M/S/P (Minnie Graham, Vaughn) to close debate.

The vote was taken and the item passed unanimously.

Agenda Item #9 - Proposed Discontinuance of the Bachelor of Arts in Creative

Arts: Concentration in Interdisciplinary Arts

Educational Policies Council Chair Helen Goldsmith introduced the College

of Creative Arts proposal to discontinue the Bachelor of Arts in Creative Arts,

Concentration in Interdisciplinary Arts, stating that EPC (made up of APC and

CRAC) discussed the proposal and concurs with the discontinuance.

Lee Jenkins asked to know more about why it is being discontinued. Jim

Davis, director of the Inter-Arts Center, replied that it is all about money.

The program was barely making it with funding back in 1989, and the massive

cuts in 1992 made it worse. He said that with three programs, they decided to

do two well rather than three poorly. They inquired about archiving it, but

you cannot archive programs, just courses. The Inter-Arts Center still offers

course opportunities campus-wide for undergraduates.

M/S/P (Vaughn, Kelley) to second reading.

M/S/P (Vaughn, Kelley) to close debate.

The vote was taken and the item passed.

Agenda Item #10 - Proposed Revisions to the Master of Arts in Creative Arts:

Concentration in Interdisciplinary Arts

CRAC Chair Wong introduced the College of Creative Arts proposal for

changes in the M.A. in Creative Arts, Concentration in Interdisciplinary Arts,

that will increase the applied aspect of the M.A. program so that a greater

balance between theory and practice is provided the students.

Vijay Ganji asked about the funding situation for this master's program.

Davis answered that it is a small program, and the funding level will be better

with the elimination of the B.A., comparable to most programs. He said that

they have a tenure-track search, which will stabilize the program, and the proposals

increase core requirements, which indicates greater support.

M/S/P (Fehrman, Vaughn) to second reading.

M/S/P (Oñate, Vaughn) to close debate.

The vote was taken and the item passed unanimously.

Agenda Item #11 - Proposed Revisions to the Master of Arts in Creative Arts:

Concentration in Creativity and Arts Education

CRAC Chair Wong introduced the College of Creative Arts proposal for

revisions to the Master of Arts in Creative Arts, Concentration in Creativity

and Arts Education.

M/S/P (Vaughn, Fehrman) to second reading.

M/S/P (Fehrman, Vaughn) to close debate.

The vote was taken and the item passed unanimously.

The Senate was adjourned at 3:30 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Dane Johnson

Secretary to the Faculty

Meeting Date (Archive)