May 9th, 2023


Academic Senate

Plenary Meeting Minutes

Tuesday 9 May 2023

Hybrid – Zoom & Seven Hills

2:00 PM




OPEN FLOOR PERIOD:  2:00 - 2:05 PM


  1. Approval of the Agenda for 9 May 2023
  2. Approval of the Minutes for 2 May 2023
  3. Announcements from the Floor


  1. Reports

    1. Chair’s Report

May 16 meeting hybrid and will include outgoing commendations and incoming Senate elections; Everyone is encouraged to stay for the meeting with a President’s office sponsored reception to follow. Assigning Senators to committee now – please respond to the survey to match with top committee choices. Poll released to see about in-person attendance May 16 (29 yes/21 no)

    1. President’s Report

Small sample of remarkable events (too many to count): LCA faculty showcase; COSE annex filled with student research; CHSS event. Awe inspiring. Big project next year: improvement to Title IX – last week in May Cozen will present finding for BOT – aggregate and campus reports. CSU will get in mid-July the state audit of Title IX and DHR. Cozen is like a program review with recommendations; state audit is a legal finding and we are obligated to enact. Implementation committee formed with influence by CO and includes shared governance partner recommendations; we added three faculty reps, student rep and staff reps. Jamillah Moore as interim title IX coordinator will chair and will welcome a new interim as co-chair. Will view as a year-long process to improve processes and change institutional culture; we also want to enhance academic freedom. Teddy Albiniak staff. Year long process to start in fall. Wish you a restful and productive summer.

Goldman: When is report released to campus? Mahoney: Around June 1; Audit mid-July

Stein: How far does Title IX/DHR extend to?  LM: Title IX is broader/federal; DHR is HR and we need Ingrid Williams to answer more clearly. DHR does not go to hearing if there are findings. But this is the kind of question we hope the committee clarifies

Castillo: Really important for SAFE space coordinators and we have been missing the crucial role – wondering about that position and how soon we can hire into? LM: Search underway now and can find out from Moore the status. Will be filled before next semester.

    1. Standing Committees

      1. Academic Policies Committee

Beatty: New grading policy in second reading

Goldman: Thank Beatty and the entire committee for your work.

      1. Campus Curriculum Committee

Harvey; Second reading of proposals

Goldman; Thanks to the committee

      1. Faculty Affairs Committee

Rubin: Second reading bylaws

Goldman: Thanks the Committee; Beatty and Rubin rotating off and thanking them for service

      1. Strategic Issues Committee

Trousdale: 2nd reading Administrative Search policy

Goldman Thanks the committee

      1. Student Affairs Committee

Olsher: none

Goldman: Thanks the committee



  1. Recommendation from the Academic Policies Committee on Grading Policy (new), in second reading.

Beatty moves and speaks to changes (eg 65-66, 154-55 – added language about incomplete grades when instructor is not available – department chair can resolve. 

Wilson speaks in support, new wording addresses the need and strikes the right balance

Goldman call vote: Item passes (41/1/3) (yes/no/abstain)

  1. Recommendation from Faculty Affairs Committee Policy on Department and Equivalent Unit By-Laws, in second reading.

Rubin moves and speaks; slightly revised including “equivalent and faculty units” and focus on shared governance. This is a template so allow flexibility.

Hellman: Propose amendment at line 191: “Non-teaching faculty units (e.g. Library, Counselors) should adapt this list to reflect their specific essential work” Harvey seconds. No discussion. Passes:  34/0/8

Goldman calls vote: Item passed (35/2/5)

  1. Recommendation from Strategic Issues Committee on Revision to S19-180 Search Committees for San Francisco State University Administrators Policy, in second reading.

Trousdale moves and speaks. Effects whole campus, needed update. Changes data collection process for search pool; improvements and clarity behind ExCom population of search committees; changes to percentage of faculty on the committee and simplifies language; biggest changes to interim appointments

Stein: Not sure how I vote but will express concerns 98% support but one element of concern Look at 164-66 and deals with retreat rights. I have trouble what this will entail since university policy references department policy. If I take this section literally, this is a huge departure from recent practice. Not sure its intended or administered this way.

Trogu: Question – can Stein describe the current process?

Stein: I would like to respond but I am not sure I am allowed to respond; can someone else explain general rather than specific. 


Way: Broadly – we don’t have student evaluations because we haven’t taught. In my case, criminal justice studies looked at material, faculty reviewed and made decision. Also happened at Emerson. Sometimes it is a CV because of quickness of the process. They did have a quick turn around, there were only so many faculty work days and didn’t want to work beyond that. Not sure what the normal process is, but that was my process

Mahoney: Deeply appreciate his concern about the integrity of the process and it will be unsatisfying. I’ve done this four times and it is different at each campus. At CSULB I met with history department and they wanted to know about GE but they had admin questions for me. At CSULA, they asked for syllabi. For Presidential search, they had about 7 seconds. Mandolfo is not here because of search but I think we have improved because they meet with candidates. Not easy to recruit administrators and we are competing with people who have multiple offers because they have a. time and b. because a lot of bureaucracy will be different than other places. All of these folks have gone through the tenure process. I have respect for our colleagues form places we recruit and respect other institutions.

Stein: I agree with most of what President Mahoeny said. The only part I don’t is deferring to other institutions. We should go through our process and we should talk about what’s right for SF State. I was hired with tenure and I don’t remember what was asked for. Its given me great concern that someone deny tenure in the future and asked in a court of law whether they were applying consistent rules. Leads me to conclude that our policies are adhoc. We are adopting a policy with the wink and we arent going to abide by it and that concerns me. I’m hesitant to approve a policy I know we arent going to follow.

Harvey: proposes amendment to 181-186:

A majority of faculty members (e.g. 6 faculty on a 10 member committee), selected from the Faculty Search Committee Pool in the manner described in A.6.  This faculty majority should consist of faculty across academic affairs units such as at least one member from each college and the Library.

                Stein: Would vote no and let sit to next year and capture language that says we need to do this.

                                Goldman: No second – amendment withdrawn

Stein: Amendment on line 166: modified when necessary with the approval of the University Tenure Promotion Committee. Trogu seconds.

Grutizik: For your next year idea, I would be interested in seeing it improved there and not here.  Way: I wanted to know the department was okay and it sounds like the University is making the decision and not the department. Stein: I’ve asked if when can have the CV etc and I’ve been told no and that’s what concerns me. Trogu: Since the process can or should not be reveal Stein’s amendment would safeguard against claims of unfairness. Passes with Vote 28/5/9

Harvey: proposes the following amendment

lines 181, 194, 206, • A majority of faculty members (e.g. 6 faculty on a 10 member committee), selected from the Faculty Search Committee Pool in the manner described in A,6.

Hellman seconds. Vote: passes (25/7/7)

Pasion: I’ve been searching the RTP and It says “tenure at time of appointment” there is no use of the word retreat. Reads into the record. Trogu: line refers to faculty teaching appointments, don’t believe it refers to admin appointments which may come with tenure. Stein: I think it applies to all appointments after all one gets appointed to a position after the department.  It bypasses and makes me like my amendment even more because it gives the university committee a role in an expedited process.

                Goldman calls vote on the item, as amended. Item passes (31/1/10)

Goldman calls a 5 minute break to return at 3:32pm


  1. Recommendation from Executive Committee: Resolution to Reinstate and Recast the Teaching Effectiveness Assessment Task Force, in second reading.

Erickson: moves and says that the changes were made that were not included Goldman: these are part of the proposed resolution. Grutzik: Is there a timeline on this deliverable? ExCom recommended the committee itself determines calendar and timeline.

Stein: I wanted to delete the last two lines. Goldman: It was deleted already. Can you put the latest version in the chat?

Erickson: this is the latest version:

Goldman calls vote. Item passes (31/1/7)


  1. Revision of the charge to the All-University Committee on Disability (AUCD), S06-24 policy, submitted by that Senate Subcommittee, in second reading.

Olsher moves and speaks to the item. Goldman calls vote; item passed (29/0/9)


Recommendations from the Campus Curriculum Committee, in second reading

  1. BA in Child Development Pre-K to 3rd Grade, new program
  2. BA in Women and Gender Studies, Reducing units > 20% from 39 to 30 units
  3. Minor in California Studies Reducing units >20% from 21 to 15 units
  4. Minor in Pacific Asian Studies, Transfer Administrative Housing within the College of Liberal & Creative Arts
  5. BA in Business, Concentration in Business Analytics

Harvey calls to batch 10-14. No objection; Grutzik wants to speak in favor of new BA in Child Development Pre-K – 3rd Grade; Goldman calls vote: items pass (35/0/2)

  1. Certificate in Teaching Post-Secondary Reading, Distance Education Authorization
  2. BS in Hospitality and Tourism Management, Distance Education Authorization
  3. Certificate in Teaching of Composition, Distance Education Authorization
  4. MA in Composition, Distance Education Authorization
  5. BA in Creative Writing, Distance Education Authorization

Harvey calls to batch 15-19. No objections. Vote passes (34/0/2)

Gerber: Where is batching in Roberts Rules?

Goldman: It’s not; we sort of made it up.

Goldman thanks executive committee members and senators


Adjournment: 3:55 PM


This is 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.

Meeting Date (Archive)