March 18, 2025

 

 March 18, 2025

 

2:00-2:05 PM: Open Floor Period: The Open Floor Period provides an informal opportunity for campus community members to raise questions or make comments directed to Senators, Senate officers or to university administrators. Please arrive promptly at 2:00 PM. Please limit comments to not more than three minutes per topic. Senators may make announcements under Item 3 below.

 

Sen. Brewer shared an upcoming event of a planetarium show and a speaking event presented in both Spanish and English. Flyers linked here: English Version and  Spanish Version

 

 

2:05 PM: Call to Order

 

 

1. Approval of agenda 

 

Vice Chair Holschuh made a motion to move the president’s report to immediately after the provost’s report.

Sen. Harvey seconded the amendment.

 

Yes: 35

No: 0

Abstain: 0

 

The agenda is approved as amended, subsequently placing the item as number 14 on the agenda.

 

1. Approval of minutes from previous plenary

 

Sen. Segovia-McGahan noted that in the minutes, it should say “Alejandro Murguia” and that an “a” was left off. 

 

The minutes are approved as amended by general consent.

 

The March 4, 2025 minutes were approved at 2:10 pm.

 

 

1. Senator announcements: Any senator can speak to no more than 3 minutes per topic.  This is a good time for senators who are college representatives to share announcements from their respective colleges.

 

Sen. Roehrman shared that Deborah Nadoolman Landis, costume designer, will be giving a talk on Friday 4/4 in the Coppola Theater as part of the Cinema Filmmaking Master class and is open to the public.

 

Sen. Lynch shared that the showcase  ambassador sign up: Qualtrics Survey | Qualtrics Experience Management Showcase Sign Up: Register to Table at Explore SF State - April 5th, 2025 | 9:00am-1:30pm

 

Sen. Islami shared that this Thursday, the Spring Equinox is Nowruz (New Year) for Persians and is celebrated around the world. 

 

Sen. Harvey shared that the mindful movement is taking place tomorrow from 12-1pm in HSS 306 by Holistic Health.

 

1. Reports

 

1. Senate chair's report

 

Chair Wilson emphasized that shared governance necessitates active participation, with the Senate serving as a key example of this collaborative engagement. He encouraged current senators to engage with members of the campus community to explore their interest in participating in the Academic Senate through the nomination process. Additionally, Chair Wilson provided links to the individual college nomination forms:

 

• Lam Family College of Business
• College of Science & Engineering
• College of Ethnic Studies
• Graduate College of Education
• College of Health & Social Science
• College of Liberal and Creative Arts
• Library
• All Staff
  
  3. University president's report

 

Chair Wilson announced that the March UBC meeting will take place on Thursday, March 20. Individuals interested in attending are encouraged to contact UBC@sfsu.edu. During this meeting, the committee will vote on the three proposed budget scenarios.

He also noted that the All-University Discussion is scheduled for Thursday, March 20, from 2:00 to 3:00 PM via Zoom: Zoom Link.

Additionally, Chair Wilson highlighted the upcoming Question of Interest session, which will take place on April 23 from 1:00 to 2:30 PM in LIB 121. Organized by Senate Executive Committee At-Large Member Frederik Green, this session will focus on the theme: "Let's Connect: Creating Synergies Across Colleges and Disciplines."

Finally, Chair Wilson noted that there will be four plenary sessions, with further details to be provided in due course.

 

4.2. University provost's report

 

Prov. Sueyoshi Provost Sueyoshi acknowledged that the university is undergoing a resizing process, noting that communication surrounding these changes has been inconsistent. To address this, the Provost plans to issue a university-wide message providing a comprehensive overview of the restructuring efforts across various departments and colleges.

As part of this process, the administration has directed deans and colleges to streamline and reassess programs, working collaboratively with departments to explore reorganization or, if necessary, program discontinuation. The IRC is currently developing a list of suggested program discontinuations as part of these efforts.

Additionally, discussions continue regarding faculty workload, particularly the 4:4 versus 3:3 teaching load, in alignment with the university's objective to increase the student-to-faculty ratio to match that of the two other CSU campuses operating on a 3:3 model. This shift may result in larger class sizes, additional course assignments, or other adjustments. Faculty collaboration is essential in meeting these structural changes.

The university is also exploring a labor exchange model, allowing faculty to teach in other departments where additional instructional support is needed. Furthermore, the Chancellor’s Office is closely monitoring federal developments that may impact the university.

Finally, with graduation approaching, the university is seeking ambassadors and marshals to support commencement activities.

 

Sen. Segovia McGahan asked in the chat if there were enough physical classrooms to accommodate the SFR for in-person classes. Prov. Sueyoshi noted Michael Scott and the colleges can assist with finding classrooms to accommodate larger class sizes.

 

 

Pres. Mahoney is currently in Sacramento advocating for the CSU budget, noting that there is an anticipated decline in enrollment across the system in addition to the ongoing budget issues.

Additionally, concerns remain regarding the federal government's fiscal outlook and its potential impact on future funding. However, the university remains in compliance with all regulations and is actively engaged in discussions with the California Attorney General’s Office and the CSU’s General Counsel to navigate any legal or financial implications. The president noted that we will focus on our students and our mission as a university and comply with the law.

 

3. Associated Students President's report

 

Sen. Foley expressed enthusiasm about participating in CSU Advocacy Day in Sacramento.

Additionally, Governing Gators is scheduled to meet tomorrow. Gator Groceries continues discussions with private donors and has set a $20,000 fundraising goal for the SFSU Day of Giving, with the broader objective of reaching $50,000 by April 7.

Last weekend, Sen. Foley attended the Higher Education Student Summit, where they lobbied state senators regarding the proposed budget cuts to higher education.

 

3. Standing committee reports

 

 

1. Academic Policies Committee

 

Sen. Islami noted APC is bringing revision to the written English proficiency policy and is continuing to work on the restructuring of the academic units policy, the course cancellation policy, and the online and distance education policy for future meetings. 

 

 

1. Campus Curriculum Committee

 

Sen. Harvey shared that CCC has moved through most of the proposals and now working on resolutions considerations to direct and indirect cost policies on budget decisions being made.

 

1. Faculty Affairs Committee

 

Sen. Brown gave notice that FAC has two policies in plenary today; the emerita/emeritus policy and the department chairs and equivalent units policy. The committee continues to work on additional policies that the committee hopes to bring to plenary this semester.

 

1. Strategic Issues Committee

 

Sen. Trousdale gave notice that SIC is bringing item nine to the plenary and item ten to the plenary today. The committee continues to talk about the budget and academic freedom policy.

 

1. Student Affairs Committee

 

Sen. Christensen announced that SAC has no items to present at today’s plenary session but is actively working on two forthcoming resolutions. The first resolution focuses on mentorship as a key factor in student success, while the second calls for a comprehensive report and assessment on instruction in reading and writing across campus. Additionally, SAC continues to investigate and analyze response rates for SETES as part of its ongoing efforts.

 

1. Educational Policies Council

Sen. Islami shared that EPC is a combination of APC and CCC and as a part of its current work, the EPC plans to present program discontinuances at today’s plenary session. These proposals are in their second readings.  EPC will bring additional discontinuances to future meetings. 

 

Informational Items: An informational item is a statement announcing the completion of a process, carried out in accordance with Senate policy, and requiring formal notification of the Senate at its conclusion. 

 

Consent Items:  A consent item is one deemed by the initiating committee and the Executive Committee to be non-controversial, requiring no debate. Any Senator may request to debate the item, in which case it is considered as new business in first reading.  If there is no request to debate, the Chair will declare debate closed and the motion adopted by “General Consent.”  It may be read into the record, or we may move directly to the next agenda items.

 

Continuing Business: Continuing (once called Old) Business involves items returning to the Senate, usually in Second Reading, but occasionally still in First Reading. Items in the Second Reading belong to the Senate as a whole rather than to an individual or committee. Comments on Second Reading items should be confined to those for or against or proposing specific amendments. We ordinarily limit each speaker to three minutes. Senators may yield their time to non-Senators if needed. Amendments and the final document are passed or not passed by majority vote. 

 

Educational Policies Council

 

4. Discontinuation: Certificate in Youth and Human Services Nonprofit Administration

 

Chair Wilson asked if Sen. Islami would like to move the Certificate in Youth and Human Services Nonprofit Administration to discontinuation. 

 

Sen. Islami moves to discontinue the Certificate in Youth and Human Services Nonprofit Administration. 

 

Sen. Islami noted there has been a decline in the number of enrolled students and the resignation of a key faculty member who supported this program. Conversations with the affected parties have taken place and EPC has voted unanimously in favor of discontinuing this certificate.

 

Chair Wilson noted that there were no additional speakers and called into question the vote for discontinuing of the certificate. 

 

Vice Chair Holshuch facilitated the vote for the discontinuation of the certificate.

 

Yes: 40

No: 0

Abstain: 7

 

 

4. Discontinuation: Master of Sciences in Interdisciplinary Marine and Estuarine Science

 

Sen. Islami moved to discontinue the Master of Science in Interdisciplinary Marine and Estuarine Science program due to a decline in enrolled students and the expiration of a grant in 2021 that had largely supported the program. Without the grant funding, the program has become financially unsustainable. Furthermore, the program is not housed within an academic department but operates under the EOS Center. Students enrolled in the program have been informed that they will be offered alternative courses to meet the requirements for their degree completion.

 

Sen. Harvey shared that he is proud of how this process has been carefully considered and gone through the due diligence of slow and transparent.

 

Sen. Sinha expressed opposition to the discontinuation of the Master of Science in Interdisciplinary Marine and Estuarine Science program, arguing that this is an area in which the university should focus on recruiting students. The senator highlighted that the program may be particularly relevant to the agricultural sector, suggesting that there could be emerging needs in this field that the university could address by maintaining the program.

 

Sen. Hellman speaks in favor of this proposal and pointed out that the discontinuations are initiated by the programs themselves, and expressed his support for the motion, emphasizing that it is important to respect the decisions and expertise of the programs involved. He noted that the programs are in the best position to assess their own viability and that their knowledge should be trusted in these matters.

 

Chair Wilson noted that there were no additional speakers and called into question the vote for discontinuing of the degree. 

 

Vice Chair Holshuch facilitated the vote for the discontinuation of the certificate.

 

Yes: 38

No: 3 

Abstain: 9

 

 

New Business: New Business items are brought by a committee or individual to the Senate in First Reading, during which open discussion and debate may occur. We ordinarily limit each speaker to three minutes. Senators may yield their time to non-Senators if needed. The item is then returned to the Committee for further revision, to be brought back as Continuing Business in Second Reading. 

 

Faculty Affairs Committee

 

4. Department Chairs and Equivalent Unit Directors, #S24-145

 

Sen. Brown moves the Department Chairs and Equivalent Unit Directors policy.

 

Sen. Todd Roehrman shared that the review of this policy began under the previous FAC committee from the previous year, with consultations involving the Office of Faculty Affairs and the University Chairs Council. Several issues were identified and addressed in the revision. The previous policy did not address compensation for department chairs, so a new section was added to clarify the "term and compensation" of the role, with chairs now required to serve on a 12-month contract for the entire three-year term. A transparent mechanism for calculating the chair time base will be developed and made available to the university community. While there was debate over the specifics of the calculation, the policy now ensures transparency without specifying exact factors, as the ultimate authority on this rests with administrators. The policy also encourages departments to consider equity and shared governance in the chair selection process, and it promotes the rotation of chairs. To further support fairness, chairs are now limited to two consecutive three-year terms unless re-elected by a two-thirds vote of the faculty. Additionally, the nomination process must be extended to all faculty members at the end of each term to encourage self-nominations. The policy now requires departments to ensure equity in their chair selection process, which should be outlined in their bylaws. Regarding the chair experience and promotion, the policy allows department chairs to count their chair role as their primary assignment when seeking promotion to associate or full professor, recognizing the significant time commitment of the position. There was also concern about the inclusion of staff in the chair selection process, with many departments advocating for staff participation, given their close working relationship with the chair. The policy leaves this decision to individual departments, specifying that staff can vote if provided for in their bylaws. Finally, regarding chair midterm feedback, the policy allows chairs to determine who receives feedback but clarifies that the data is confidential, though not anonymous, as review committees may have access to respondent identities. Chairs also have the discretion to share feedback with faculty and the college dean. 

 

Sen. Hellman asked about compensation in terms of 12-month contracts for faculty chairs and how this conflates with the standard faculty 10-month contract. Sen. Brown clarified that most department chairs are paid on a 12-month contract. 

 

Sen. Sohler shared in the chat an inquiry from a staff member “ Is there some greater rationale for delegating staff voting rights to the departments?” Sen. Brown shared that there were some concerns regarding providing votes in the context of someone electing their supervisor and the issue surrounding curriculum.

 

Sen. Pogrow suggested a change to add to line 63 to include the Ed.D. program. Sen. Pogrow shared that he believes there is no recourse for faculty to file a grievance regarding shared governance or program quality. Sen. Pogrow suggests that the director should retain the same responsibilities as a department chair. Sen. Brown noted this will be discussed in committee.

 

Sen. Sinha asked about line 84 and asked if lecturer faculty were included and that protecting lecturer faculty is of concern. He suggested removing them altogether or give them a full vote out of concern for retaliation. Sen. Roehrman noted that lecturer faculty votes are based on time base, voting is anonymous, and votes are rounded up to full votes.

 

Sen. Harvey asked about line 215 regarding elections. He also noted line 174, bylaws for new programs in which faculty from one program join another and what respective bylaws they should follow. He also noted that on lines 62-63 Academic degree-granting equivalent units that do not have their own faculty are - intended to be covered by this policy. Sen. Harvey suggested removing the second “not” from this line. Additionally, Sen. Harvey suggested that in lines 124-125, the Hiring, Retention, Tenure, and Promotion HRT/P committee acronym remains consistent. Sen. Brown noted that she will bring these back to the committee for discussion.

 

Sen. Trousdale noted that lines 91-95 on the recalculating time base every three years and asked why it would only change every three years. Sen. Brown noted that this is because this is when a new term would begin and the working conditions would change the time base.

 

Sen. Pogrow expressed concerns regarding lines 169-172, specifically regarding assistant professors serving as department chairs. He noted that assistant professors may not be adequately prepared for the role and raised concerns that the administrative responsibilities could hinder their ability to pursue scholarly work. As a result, he suggested that assistant professors either be excluded from serving as department chairs or that their work in this role not be considered as part of the tenure evaluation process. Sen. Brown shared that these suggestions will be discussed with the committee.

 

Sen. Shaw asked for clarification on why an assistant professor would be asked to be a chair and if it could be a problem of vulnerability to be in that kind of position. Sen. Shaw wanted to know how this thought came to be. They also noted the concern about staff being able to vote and acknowledged the concerns, but that they would like to see staff be able to vote. Concern about rotation of chair and would like to hear more about all of the ideas. Sen. Brown noted that for a variety of reasons assistant professors do have to take on this role and FAC wanted to be able to provide protections for them. Sen. Brown noted that for a third term, they would need a 2/3 majority.

 

Sen. Green asked about the mechanisms for calculating the time base at the beginning of each academic year. Sen. Brown shared that the formula has not been seen by FAC yet and is still under development. 

 

The item will proceed to the second reading.

 

 

4. Policy on Emerita/Emeritus Status, #F14-147

 

Sen. Brown moved the policy.

 

Sen. Klein spoke to the item, explaining that this policy came to the FAC from previous members who began working on it in 2023. The CFA also requested revisions to the policy to allow for more lecturer faculty who have contributed to the campus for decades but may not meet the traditional requirements for emeritus status. To better understand the policy, the committee consulted with ITS, AT, Faculty Affairs, and Human Resources.

Several issues were identified and addressed in the revision. One of the main considerations was the gendered language of "emerita/emeritus." To address this, the committee changed the language to "Emeriti," a plural term often used in ungendered contexts, and added a parenthetical reference throughout the policy to include Emerita/Emeritus/Emeritx to enhance inclusivity in the designation.

Another key issue was the time required to earn emeriti status. The current policy requires 10 years of full-time service, with lecturer faculty needing to meet this requirement at a 1.0 full-time equivalency. The committee reviewed proposals from CFA and previous FAC members and consulted emeriti policies from other CSUs, finding that 10 years is typically the minimum. Given the importance of emeriti status as an honor and distinction, the committee decided to offer flexibility for lecturer faculty who have provided substantial service over 10 years, even if they did not work full-time. The proposed revision allows for 10 years at 60% time, 15 years at 40% time, or an equivalent aggregate of time worked.

Additionally, the committee consulted with Academic Technology regarding technology privileges and included language to clarify that technology privileges beyond email will be provided when resources, budget, and compliance requirements are met. The committee also revisited the section concerning emeriti faculty who continue to work at the university. As many current faculty members are not provided clerical support or sufficient office spaces, the committee chose to make this section more flexible. Faculty who continue to work will have the right to administer grants, among other duties. Furthermore, the language around scholarly activities was broadened to include research, teaching, and creative activities.

 

Sen. Pasion sought clarification on whether the proposed changes would impact faculty who had already retired. In response, Sen. Brown assured that the changes would not affect previously retired faculty members.

 

Sen. Anderson requested clarification on the motivation behind the policy. In response, Senator Brown explained that the primary goal was to clarify the policy regarding the services that could be offered to retired faculty, ensuring transparency and consistency in its implementation.

 

Prov. Sueyoshi asked if there was any consideration for retired faculty who had engaged in substantiated claims of misconduct post-retirement. She suggested the possibility of removal of the emeritus status and title should one engage in substantiated misconduct and will follow up with the committee via email.  

 

The item will proceed to the second reading.

 

Strategic Issues Committee

 

4. All University Committee on International Programs, #S20-151

 

Chair Wilson returned to item nine at the completion of the presentations by the plenary guests. 

 

Sen. Trousdale moved the item and explained that the proposed changes to the AUCIP charge would clarify AUCIP's role on campus, clarify the roles of individual members, add one ex-officio member from CPaGE, allow for there to be two co-chairs and establish a set meeting day and time.

 

Chair Wilson asked if there are any changes to the current charge addressing the current issues facing international students. Sen. Trousdale shared that he would bring this back to the committee to review.

 

Sen. Collins spoke in favor of this proposal and the current need for supporting these international programs.

 

The proposal will proceed to the second reading.

 

4. Resolution Endorsing AS-3609-23 Encouraging Campus Faculty Legislative

Liaisons

 

Sen. Trousdale moved the item and explained that this resolution stems from the need for a campus-specific legislative advocate, a role that would parallel the CSU-wide legislative advocate but function at the campus level. This position would be designated as an academic senate seat.

Sen. Collins added that the establishment of this role would also create a direct pipeline between the ASCSU and the campus, facilitating the sharing of data and insights regarding the campus experience.

 

The proposal will proceed to the second reading.

 

Academic Policies Committee

 

4. University Policy on Written English Proficiency, S19-014

 

Sen. Islami motioned to move item eleven. They noted that while the policy revisions are minor, they will have a significant impact. The key change acknowledges that GWAR courses are not offered in all programs, though they remain a requirement. This policy update allows departments to determine which GWAR courses from other departments can fulfill degree requirements.

 

Guest, Claude Bartholomew, noted that consultations are required and the department approval is documented in the CourseLeaf program revision form.

 

 

 

Presentation(s)

 

 

4. National College Health Assessment: Karen Boyce, Health Promotion and Wellness Director,  Mina Hernandez, Health Communications Specialist, and Gretchen George, Associate Professor of Nutrition and Dietetics (Time approximate 3:32-4:01PM)

 

1. Presentation
2.  Reports

Guests Boyce, Hernandez, and George shared that a survey was launched and distributed by ACHA and the findings and the analyses were the following:

Key findings indicate that the majority of SFSU students report being in good health, with improved access to services. Substance use has generally declined, with a notable 15% decrease in binge drinking since 2018; however, cannabis use has increased, highlighting an area for further attention. Additionally, students generally feel safer on campus. Despite these positive trends, 46% of students reported that they would consider leaving SFSU due to housing and financial concerns, a rate higher than the CSU system average.

To address these findings, several recommended actions have been proposed. First, faculty education should be prioritized to raise awareness about these findings and the campus resources available to support students. Second, there should be a greater recognition of the impact that well-being issues have on students' academic performance. Finally, departmental policies and practices should be reviewed to ensure they support, rather than hinder, the well-being of both students and faculty.

 

Questions/Comments

 

Sen. Collins requested clarification on the slide addressing the reasons students are leaving SFSU and the reasons that students considered leaving. The top two reasons showed financial reasons and housing which are at higher rates than the CSU overall.  

 

Sen. Harvey inquired about the key messages that should be conveyed to Senate committees to prompt action. In response, Guest Boyce emphasized the need to shift cultural perceptions surrounding these challenges, normalize discussions on these issues, and proactively direct individuals to available resources before they reach a crisis point.

 

Sen. Sinha questioned the rationale for discussing housing and financial concerns together. Guest Boyce explained that the stress associated with securing and maintaining housing is a significant component and a symptom of the broader financial challenges that impact students' budgets. 

 

Sen. Yoo asked about the sample size and sought further clarification on specific changes observed in students' experiences. Guest Boyce clarified that the presentation focused on highlighting differences in responses rather than consistent trends, noting that the study sampled 10,000 students, with the analysis designed to be representative of the overall student population.

 

Sen. Christenson inquired about recommendations for addressing the epidemic of loneliness among students. Guest Boyce responded that efforts are currently underway to expand initiatives aimed at enhancing social and emotional skills in community building as a strategy to combat this issue.

 

 

 

12. Institutional Review Committee: Nancy Gerber, IRC Chair (Time approximate 4:01-4:16PM)

 

1. Presentation

Guest Nancy Gerber provided a comprehensive presentation on the formation and function of the Institutional Review Committee (IRC) under Academic Senate Policy. She detailed the structured, multi-step process by which the IRC identifies and evaluates academic programs for potential review and action.

The process begins with the IRC developing a preliminary list of programs based on institutional priorities, enrollment trends, resource availability, and alignment with the university’s strategic goals. Once this list is established, it undergoes thorough review by academic deans, who provide input and recommendations based on their respective colleges’ academic and financial considerations. Following this stage, the list is forwarded to the Provost’s Review Council, which conducts an additional level of assessment to ensure the proposed changes align with broader institutional objectives.

Ultimately, the final recommendations are presented to the Academic Senate, where they are subject to discussion, deliberation, and a formal vote. Gerber emphasized the importance of faculty and administrative collaboration throughout the process, ensuring that decisions regarding program sustainability and potential discontinuation are made transparently and with careful consideration of the university's academic mission and student needs.

 

 

Questions/Comments

 

Sen. Green inquired about the extent of dialogue between the Institutional Review Committee (IRC) and the administration regarding the planned and proposed budget, particularly in light of the pending state budget cuts. Guest Nancy Gerber responded by clarifying that the IRC's current work is set to conclude at the end of the Spring 2025 semester. As a result, any future budget reductions occurring beyond this timeframe will not be factored into the IRC’s current review and decision-making process.

 

Sen. Collins inquired whether the IRC was considering proposals from faculty regarding potential departmental mergers and whether a similar process to the "Design Your University" initiative from 2008— which allowed for anonymous submissions and suggestions—was being utilized. Guest Nancy Gerber responded that no such tool or formal mechanism was currently in place within the IRC. However, she noted that some departments have already begun to think creatively about possible restructuring efforts in response to institutional needs and budgetary constraints.

 

 

Adjournment: Time Definite 4:33PM

 

Alesha Sohler

Secretary

 

 

 

Attendance

 

 

 

 

Absent

 

 

Guests

 

 

Post-Plenary Floor Period: This is ordinarily an informal opportunity for senators and guests to meet, exchange information, or follow up on items or questions emerging from the meeting. It will ordinarily run for thirty minutes from the end of formal business, but not beyond 5:00 PM, if people remain online or in the room.