October 30, 2012

SF State Academic Senate           

Seven Hills Conference Center – Nob Hill Room

10/30/2012

Academic Senate minutes

 

 

OPEN FLOOR PERIOD:  2:00 - 2:10 p.m.

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

 

ATTENDANCE:

Absences: Alvarenga, Gabriela (exc); Boyle, Andrea (exc); Burke, Adam (exc); Chernoff, Maxine (exc); Drennan, Marie (abs); Flores, Oscar (abs); Getz, Trevor (exc); Hood, Pamela (exc); Prive, Alice (exc); Sigmon, Mark (abs); Strong, Robert (exc); Usowicz, Thaddeus (abs); Vaughn, Pamela (exc)

 

 

Parliamentarian: Ray Trautman

 

 

Guests: Sacha Bunge, Maggie Beers, Gene Chelberg, Jared Giarrusso, Caran Colvin, Helen Goldsmith, Linda Oubre, Tim Paulson, Shaun Whalen, Megan Wolf 

 

 

CALL TO ORDER: 2:15 p.m.

With a quorum present, the meeting was called to order

 

 

 

ANNOUNCEMENTS

• (Chair Hanley) Text Book orders needed (Deadline was 10/22!): To facilitate ordering, a new online adoption tool has been added.  The "online adoptions" link can be found on the bookstore website at http://sfsu.bkstr.com under "Faculty Services" section at the bottom of the web page.
• (Collins) Faculty Honors and Awards committee is seeking nominations for the 2012/2013 academic year.  Nominations are for the following categories:   Sarlo Excellence in Teaching Award, Excellence in Professional Achievement, and Excellence in Service.  Please see the Academic Senate website for details.  Deadline for nominations will be March 1, 2013.
• (Rourke).  The Committee on Committees is seeking three (3) additional Senators to review committee reports for the Committee on Committees Report.  Reviewers would be asked to review approximately three reports and asked to submit a report brief.  The review would take approximately 2 hours of a senator’s time to be completed within the month of November.  Interested senators should see David Rourke or email drourke@sfsu.edu.
• (Yee) Statewide Academic Senate meets next week, November 7-9.  Any input or feedback on pending statewide resolutions is welcome especially those comments pertaining to: the Board of Trustees Educational Policies Committee amended agenda item #3.
• (Lopez)  Senators are invited to El Dia de Los Muertos “Day of the Dead” celebration tomorrow from 12 Noon – 2 PM at Malcom X Plaza.
• (Linder)  Thank you to UPM Conference Services/Seven Hills staff for the cookies at today’s meeting.

 

 

1. Approval of the Minutes for October 16, 2012

• This item was discussed.  Moved by (Chair Hanley)
• The following points were made:

1. Minutes are approved as submitted by general consent

 

1. Approval of the Agenda for October 30, 2012

• This item was discussed.  Moved by (Chair Hanley)

• The following points were made:

1.  Agenda is approved by general consent.

 

1. Chair’s Report

• This item was discussed.  Moved by (Chair Hanley)
• The following points/highlights were made:

1.   Our business should not be deflected/inflected from those winds blowing in from elsewhere
2.   Be mindful of language and stick to the motion and debate topic.
3.   Remember, we are colleagues in a common enterprise.

 

1. Linda Buckley, AVP, for Academic Planning and Development – WASC Update

• This item was discussed.  Moved by (Chair Hanley)

• The following points/highlights  were made:

1. The WASC report is available to the university community and was the focus of this report.
2. A student focused video is available on the senate iLearn site for review.
3. WASC Review has been reported on a few times.
4. WASC is the Western Association of Schools and College and is charged with accreditation standards.
5. WASC accreditation is necessary for disbursement of financial aid and to support student transfers from one college to another.
6. SF State is in good shape for further accreditation
7. Three stage process beginning 5 years ago:  Stage 1 – Proposal Review (self-study focusing on themes of Social Justice and Civic Engagement, Student Success, and the Changing University);  Stage 2 – Capacity Review; Stage 3 – Educational Effectiveness Review (focusing on Student Learning, Student Experience, Faculty Involvement with students; emphasizing assessment and program review )
8. March 6-8 will be the next WASC reviewer’s visit.
9. The newly named CSU Chancellor was on the WASC review committee for SF State.
10. Program review and assessment will be the focus of this next visit.
11. The WASC report is equipped for comments on the website and the comments will be available to the WASC reviewers.
12. A confidential website will be available to provide confidential comments available only to the WASC reviewers.
13. Comments/Questions were related to:  Timeframe for WASC review; Student and alumni involvement; focus on student learning objectives; historical findings for WASC reviews; the process and structure of the visit; Changing expectations of WASC review; preparation for the next WASC visit;

 

1. Guest:  Tim Paulson, Executive Director, San Francisco Labor Council

• This item was discussed.  Moved by (Chair Hanley)

• The following points/highlights were made:

1. Connection/Partnerships:  Labor Council represents several council’s representing education; Several SF State graduates working on the SF Labor Council;
2. Current state of affairs/Initiatives/Ideas:  Many attacks on public employees; 1 out of 10 in the private sector are represented employees; this is increased in the public sector; privatization of public services is the current economic model and attempt to disrupt groups
3. Comments/Questions were related to:  current state of the relationships and messaging with state legislators; proactive steps in challenging current public sentiment of public employees;  

 

1. Report: Standing Committee Chairs & CSU Senate – Brief Updates on Committee Work

• This item was discussed.  Moved by (Chair Hanley)

• The following points were made:

1. APC  (Chernoff) – no report available
2. CRAC (Stowers) -  Proposed in the change MBA in emphasis in Sustainable Business to a concentration in Sustainable business; Certificate in Business ; and further discussion of private/external funding of curriculum;
3. FAC (Salama) – Discussed the Review of Center for Teaching and Faculty Development annual report and Professional Development Council report; streamlining of the WPAF and external letters;
4. SAC (Lopez) – two student appointees forwarded for approval.  Two additional appointees are being forwarded for approval.  Acknowledgment of the efforts of Joseph Greenwell, Dean of Students, for achieving 200+ students at the SF State/USF basketball game and supporting student life initiatives
5. SIC (Williams) – Recommend a policy change in the composition of APRC membership for senate agenda next week; APRC’s structure within the university; recommend Institutional Review Committee (IRC) be formed in reference to the discontinuance policy; Reviewed the draft WASC Report with AVP Buckley,
6. AS CSU Senators – (Linder/Yee-Melichar/Boyle) – Follow up to the approval of SF State’s Online Education policy, an email was forwarded regarding Calstate Online with two attachments for senators to review.  Any comments and suggestions are welcome; continued work on engaging legislators on public higher education.  Any statements or questions are welcome from senators for those meetings.

   

 

1. Recommendation from the Curriculum Review & Approval Committee: Proposed Revision to Sustainable Business Emphasis to a Concentration in Sustainable Business under the MBA, 1^st Reading—Time Certain: no later than 3:00p.m.

• This item was discussed.  Moved by (Stowers)

• The following points/Highlights were made:

1.       An emphasis can be handled through advising, a concentration is a formal degree noted on the transcript
2. The emphasis was reviewed approximately 6-7 years ago.
3. This item comes with unanimous approval of CRAC
4. Line 16 mentions “the existing emphasis and the proposed concentration requires the sustainability focused MBA student to take three specific electives” the use of electives and requirement is confusing
5. Line 50-54 suggestion to consider student learning objectives should be considered for the concentration not just for the MBA.
6. Student learning objectives are not required for all separate concentrations

 

1. Recommendation from the Strategic Issues Committee: Proposed Revision to the Academic Program Review Committee membership composition , 1^st Reading

• This item was discussed.  Moved by (Williams)

• The following points/highlights were made:

1.  Chronic membership and attendance concerns with this committee  and is the focus of the proposal.
2.   With membership concerns, how will increasing the membership solve the problem?  How does this revision address motivation?
3. 12 members seem congruent with other university and senate committees and the workload is heavy for the committee membership.
4. The larger concern remains that senior faculty are spread thinly.  Junior faculty members are encouraged not to participate in service related activities.
5. Is the last bullet, “The chair shall receive one course release for two semesters, and the remaining members shall receive one course release for one semester.” still realistic?
6. Move (Holzman) to second reading, seconded (Stowers).
7. Motion passes by majority vote.  Item is considered in second reading.
8. Motion (Ginwala) to amend the second bullet in “Membership” to strike the word “selected” to read “Shall consist of Twelve Faculty Members, two selected from each college”, seconded (Williams)
9. Motion passes by majority vote.  The item is amended.
10. Request (Bettinger) for Information related to the release time language in the Committee membership language.
11. Motion (Linder) to amend the second bullet in “Membership” to add the word “elected” to read “Shall consist of Twelve Faculty Members, two elected from each college”, seconded (Stowers)
12. Motion to amend fails.
13. Motion (Yee) to amend the second bullet in “Membership” to strike the words “Shall consist of” to read “Shall consist of Twelve Faculty Members, two  from each college”, seconded (Stowers)
14. Motion passes by majority vote.  The item is amended.
15. Motion (Hellman) to amend the policy to add the words “The policy shall be reviewed by the Academic Senate in the 2013-2014 academic year” at the end of the document, seconded (Steier) 
16. Motion to amend fails.
17. (Ginwala) calls the question, seconded (Steier)
18. Motion passes to adopt the revisions.

 

1. Adjournment—no later than 5:00p. 

• Moved by (Williams), seconded (Ginwala).

• Meeting is adjourned by majority vote

 

Adjournment:  4:05 PM

 

The following documents were shared and discussed within the agenda:

1. Proposed Revision to Sustainable Business Emphasis to a Concentration in Sustainable Business under the MBA
2. Proposed Revision to the Academic Program Review Committee membership composition