October 18, 2016

ACADEMIC SENATE MEETING

MINUTES

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

SEVEN HILLS CONFERENCE CENTER

NOB HILL ROOM

2:00 – 5:00 p.m.

 

 

OPEN FLOOR PERIOD:  2:00 - 2:10 p.m.

The Open Floor Period provides an informal opportunity for campus community members to raise questions or make comments directed to Senate officers or to university administrators.  Please arrive promptly at 2:00 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER: 2:10 p.m.

ATTENDANCE:

Absences: Cook, Dave (abs); Deloso, Shannon (abs); de Barro, Jose (exc); Kakar, Venoo (abs); Lewis, Julia (exc); Pasion, Sally (exc); Roehrman, Todd (exc); Soorapanth, Sada (exc); President Wong (exc)

 

Visitors: Bartholomew, Claude; Rosser, Sue

 

ANNOUNCEMENTS

• New Senators Lewis and Scott were introduced
• Sen. Williams-Health Promotion and Wellness, hunger and homelessness, food in security, Cal Fresh program, by November will be accepted at the Farmer’s Market, work study students can quality

AGENDA ITEM #1—Approval of the Minutes for October 4, 2016-approved as submitted

Allen Jung, misspelling

 

AGENDA ITEM #2—Approval of the Agenda for October 18, 2016-approved as submitted

 

AGENDA ITEM #3—Chair’s Report

• Thanks to Ron Cortez for tour of new Mashouf Wellness Center
• Thanks to the many campus responses to hateful and bullying behavior last Friday, e.g., shared response from Jewish Studies Faculty

 

AGENDA ITEM #4— Recommendation from the Executive Committee: Proposed Resolution Commending Dr. Sue Rosser for her service to San Francisco State University as Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs (consent item) [Time Certain: 2:25]

 

• Darlene Yee-Melichar presented commendation (and flowers!) to Dr. Sue Rosser, commendation is on ILearn site

 

AGENDA ITEM #5— Guest: Steven Filling, Immediate Past Chair of the Academic Senate of California State University [Time Certain: 2:35]

 

• Introduced by Troi Carleton
• Focused on Task Force on Quantitative Reasoning, included faculty in many disciplines, community colleges, UC schools, etc. Examined the type of math courses that were required, e.g., intermediate algebra, Final Report submitted, Sept 15, 2016.
• 4 recommendations, 1) defined quantitative reasoning, 2) revise quantitative reasoning requirement e.g. entry and graduation requirements, 3) ensure equitable access and opportunity to all CSU students, 4) create a Center for Advancement of Instruction in Quantitative Reasoning,
• Questions/Comments: Sen Gin-confused about resolution asking for a 4^th year or senior year, what type of courses are we talking about, impact of new standard on current students? Steven’s response-we are suggesting a course in quantitative reasoning in every year of high school, more concerned about applying mathematical principles not increasing the math ‘tool kit’, it may take 5-7 years out to see impact on underrepresented students, Sen. Kwan-what are the other quantitative courses? Will a CSU resolution address a K-12 problem? Will the Center help K-12 problem? Steven’s response-we  would like Center to work with the K-12 folks, Sen. Soloria- need to work K-12 people BEFORE putting a forward of a resolution, Steven’s response-efforts WERE made to reach out with K-12 people, Sen. Reyes-sounds more like a ambition/goal, Sen. Shapiro-we need to take into account shortage of K-12 teachers and challenges of teaching quantitative reasoning, need to identify how some underrepresented communities respond to these recommendations, will there be any evidence to support that it is working, Sen.Holton-how can my colleagues in Science and Engineering help? Steven’s response- Send a letter to system Chair.   Sen. Gin, we have a problem but resolution doesn’t address the capacity to address the problem, Sen. Bloom-equity issue, 4 year math requirement will hurt underrepresented youths, a 19^th century model is used to teach in K-12, we need to change how we teach. Steven’s response-we need to do ‘Something’ to address the problem. We certainly do not want to exclude students.

 

AGENDA ITEM #6— Information Item: “Foundations of Excellence” presented by Nancy Gerber

 

• Designed to help evaluate and improve first year experience, 2 year program,
• There are nine committees, faculty needed to sit on these committees, need co-chairs also who will sit on steering committee, send email to Sen. Gerber if interested
• Launch: Monday Oct. 31, President Wong will be there

 

AGENDA ITEM #7— Recommendation from the Academic Policies Committee: Proposed Revisions to the Course Repeat Policy (first reading)

 

• Initiated from Chancellor’s executive order,
• Changes in course repeat policy, will both courses appear on transcript? Only highest grade remain on transcript, type of grades also has been examined.
• Sen. Hammer-there are other arguments about keeping both grades on transcript
• Yee-Melichar-applies to grad students? Highest grade appears on transcript regardless of order?
• Sen. Wong-affect on courses that are repeatable for credit
• Sen. Steir-students get bad grades for different reasons, we need to know the reasons also

 

AGENDA ITEM #8 — Recommendation from the Faculty Affairs Committee: Proposed Revisions to the Retention, Tenure and Promotion Policy (first reading)

 

• Sen Sabee-discussed several revisions
• Questions/comments: Sen. Wilson - how many conflicts do we expect to have? Sen. Sabee-may need wider selection of alternates, Sen. Bloom-why just financial conflict of interest? Sen. Carleton- Conflict of role are the others. Sen. Gerber-next highest vote getter, Vice chair of Senate the right person to arbitrate? Sen.Yee-Melichar-nepotism should be included, Univ. council better arbitrator? Sen. Steir-why exclude evaluator for a year, is that too much?
• Sen. Collins-Assoc. Professor as Department Chair needs to be revisited, Sen. Sabee-why excuse for a whole year, all five members could review all files, there may be conflict of interest issue regarding Assoc. Prof. as Department Chair. Sen. Yee-Melichar-Is there data about current ranks of Department Chairs, Sen. Bloom-whole year issue needs reexamined.

 

 

AGENDA ITEM #9 —Recommendation from the Strategic Issues Committee: Proposed Resolution in support of AS 3267-16 (first reading)

 

• Sen. Mooney-move to second reading approved.
• No amendments-resolution approved unanimously

-

AGENDA ITEM #10 — Recommendation from the Student Affairs Committee: Proposed revisions to the Student Affairs Committee charge (first reading)

 

• Sen. Schwartz described revisions-line numbers have been added
• Sen. Yee-Melichar-qualify the type of student, underrepresented, campus/off campus?
• Sen. Collins-include a rationale and goal at top of the resolution

 

AGENDA ITEM #11— Standing Committee Reports

Academic Policies Committee: Senator Gerber reported that the APC will be revisiting the course repeat policy, as well as use of physical space on campus. If time allows, the committee will also revisit the perpetual calendar policy.

Curriculum Revision and Approval Committee: (no report this week--Senator Rosegard had to leave right before 4:00)

Faculty Affairs Committee: Senator Sabee reported that the committee would continue with the RTP revisions, some RTP updates on conflict of interest, UTPC membership, consulting grad associate teaching, concerned about President’s response to temporary faculty visas.

 

Strategic Issues Committee: Senator Mooney reported that next week SIC will meet with Vice-President Nava.

Student Affairs Committee: Senator Schwartz reported that SAF will examine a change to the charge of student affairs committee, and the outdated experiential learning policy

 

AGENDA ITEM #12— Adjournment—5 p.m.