September 3rd, 2024

Academic Senate

Plenary Meeting Agenda

Tuesday 3 September 2024

Seven Hills

2:00 PM

Open Floor Period:  2:00-2:05 PM

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 no more than three minutes per topic. Senators may make announcements under Item 3 below.

 

 

Call to Order: 2:05 PM

1. Approval of agenda 

 

Sen. Hellman moved to approve the agenda as read. This was seconded by Sen. Harvey. The agenda was approved as read at 2:06pm.

 

2. Approval of minutes from previous plenary Links to an external site.

 

The May 14, 2024, minutes were approved as read.

 

 

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

 

Chair Wilson summarized the announcement procedure.  He then expressed the senate’s desire that these announcements create a two-way conversation.

 

Sen. Harvey gave notice that CEETL will be hosting a workshop, AI Tools for Faculty, held September 24^th, 12-1:30pm. More information and RSVP form can be found HERE.

 

4. Reports

4.1. Senate chair's report

 

Chair Wilson gave notice that this is the first in-person meeting of the year, the last will be online, and those in between will be hyflex. He then notified all in attendance that, following today’s meeting, there will be a reception hosted by the provost. He is happy to see so. Chair Wilson then explained our use of Canvas for document management purposes. He then observed the challenges facing the campus and the CSU system, emphasizing the importance of the work everyone does. Furthermore, students starting their semesters are enthusiastic; a great thing amid these challenges. He then noted that that the senate will have fewer seats in a more reflective of the campus’s smaller size.

 

Chari Wilson then announced Rights and Wrongs: A Constitution Day Conference will be held at San Francisco State University on September 16 & 17 (more information here ). He then gave notice that Academic Technology has available resources listed in the Friday Report.

 

4.2. University president's report

President Mahoney reflected on the challenges facing the university and offered assurances that while these issues may be painful, they are not existential.  She then gave notice that the Governor’s budget includes a sizable decrease for the CSU system. People were invited to attend UBC meetings for more detailed information. President Mahoney then announced the positive adjustments to SF State’s ethically driven investment strategies, making our campus a leader on this issue. Shen then praised the ethos and action of peaceful student protest on the SF State campus.

 

The floor was then opened for questions.

 

Sen. Sinha wondered if the campus is sufficiently promoting itself as a place from which students may launch their careers (not just broaden their intellectual and experiential horizons).

 

President Mahoney noted that the campus is doing so in numerous ways. One of which is SF State’s partnership with Braven to offer the Braven Career Accelerator (see information HERE).

 

Sen. Hellman reflected on the importance of budgetary transparency on campus, and proposed seminars intended to increase budgetary literacy.

 

President Mahoney agreed, noting such a thing has been made available in the past (with good results).

 

 

Note the Provost Sueyoshi is away on travel and thus not able to offer the Provost’s Report.

 

4.3. Associated Students president's report

 

President Brandon Foley: gave notice that there is a new Student at Large Senate internship position, noting that more students are interested in student government. President Foley then moved to summarize the vital necessity of Gator Groceries (see HERE) and the program’s financial challenges.  He noted that the program served over 800 students per week last fall with similar numbers expected this fall. This is funded by Graduation Initiative 2025 (see HERE) and funds are depleting. Staffing is a large expense, and alternative funding sources are being sought.

 

Discussion was then had about how many of the 800 students live on campus (unknown) and the ubiquity of food insecurity on CSU campuses.

 

 

 

4.4. Standing committee reports

 

 

 

4.4.1. Academic Policies Committee

 

Sen. Islami gave notice that APC selected a vice chair at their recent meeting, and also discussed policies around course cancelation. This last point was, in part, prompted by student experiences with last-minute course cancelations. This raises questions about the impact to students, transparency and communication about cancelations, and the real cost savings of cuts.

 

4.4.2. Campus Curriculum Committee

 

Sen. Harvey gave notice that CCC will discuss a proposed minor in philosophy. CCC will also discuss the inner workings of the committee, including what issues may be categorized as substantive and non-substantive. 

 

4.4.3. Faculty Affairs Committee

 

 Vice Chair Holschuh explained that she will report on behalf of Sen. Brown, FAC’s chair (she is away). Vice Chair Holschuh gave notice that FAC has no present items but will continue to evaluate policies around bylaws. FAC will also explore policies around emeritus status, as this may be unfair to lecture faculty. Other items up for discussion will include tenure-track hiring (as relates to success of black and Latinx students) and the department chairs policy.

 

4.4.4. Strategic Issues Committee

 

Sen. Trousdale explained that SIC will look into changes to the Academic Freedom Policy, and will return to evaluations of instructional continuity and the findings of the Cozen O’Connor report.

 

4.4.5. Student Affairs Committee

Sen. Christensen explained that SAC had a lively discussion last week that included the topics of student hiring (as brought by TASC Executive Director, Sen. Michelle Montoya) and a resolution in support of affirmed names (as opposed to preferred names).

 

Chair Wilson underscored the importance of the issues pursued by each of these committees, and he invited all in attendance to speak to their colleagues on campus about these topics. these report.

 

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

 

None were announced.

 

• Consent Items:  A consent item is one deemed by the Chair to be non-controversial, requiring no debate. Any Senator may call the item to the floor, in which case it is considered as new business in first reading. If no Senator calls it to the floor, it is considered approved. It may be read into the record, or we may move directly to the next agenda items. 

 

Chair Wilson explained how consent items work and then invited Rick to present item 5.  

 

 

5. Minor in PhilosophyLinks to an external site.

• Continuing Business: Continuing Business involves items returning to the Senate, usually in Second Reading, but occasionally still in First Reading. Items in 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. 

 

 

Sen. Harvey explained the difference between substantive and non-substantive program changes. He offered the example of a program reducing its units by 20%. This would be a substantive change triggered by a substantive program review. CCC would then be in a position to advance to the senate floor such a change proposal.

 

 

As a consent item, this was unanimously adopted.

 

 

 

 

FIRST READING

6. Resolution: Loss of Confidence in the California State University Chancellor and Board of Trustees Ability to Effectively Consult With Faculty On Changes in CSU Curricula.

 

Vice Chair Holschuh (as acting Chair) briefly stepped in as Acting Chair and invited Sen. Wilson to introduce the item.

 

Chair Wilson explained the context for the item’s return to first reading. This included the tabling of the item for a future meeting. As tabling implies a customary 3-month timeframe, this parliamentary move does not account for academic summer breaks. As such, the item is being returned now to first reading so that it may be discussed and returned to its originating committee (in this case, ExComm).

 

The floor was opened for discussion.

 

Discussion was had about the controversial nature of the item, its timeliness, and the technicalities of tabling as a parliamentary maneuver. There was support for the central objective of the resolution.

 

 

 

A similar item, Resolution Calling for the Revision of Title V to Restrict CSU Curricular Changes to Faculty Determination, RS24-469 , was passed at the same meeting that this item was tabled.

The item was tabled at the final senate plenary last year on May 14, 2024.  However, there is concern that it was tabled beyond the common limit of 3 months into the future .  Therefore, per the Academic Senate bylaws., the item is brought back in first reading for further discussion.

Voting: in-person (hand raising), online (yes, no, abstain)

• 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. 
• Presentation(s)

7. Robert's Rules  (Will occur before the first vote)

 

Vice Chair Holschuh offered an explanation of our use of Robert’s Rules and then demonstrated the parliamentary procedure for bringing a new item to the senate floor.

 

8. Children's Campus: SAEM VP Jamillah Moore, Director of Business Operations David Schachman, and Associate Vice President Dai To (Time certain 3PM)

 

SAEM VP Moore explained that she and members of SAEM are here to provide an update on Children’s Campus.

 

SAEM AVP To provided the history of Children’s campus and its role as a pedagogical resource for child and adolescent development program students. She then explained the impact of the COVID lockdown on Children’s Campus’s enrollment and thus diminished budget. She then explained various moves intended to cut costs, and its ongoing financial instability.

 

SAEM VP Moore explained numerous proposals advanced to sustain Children’s Campus, and then the difficulties each proposal would encounter. She then explained its proposed move to Associated Students’ ECEC. Moving in this direction buys the program an additional year to consider viable alternatives.

 

Discussion was had about the efficacy of the move to ECEC, the availability of backup options, and what alternate sources of funding might be available.

 

 

David Anderson, Director of the Edelman Institute (guest from Advisory Council), explained that Academic Affairs is actively pursuing alternative funding sources, relating that the city has childcare money (due to a successful lawsuit outcome). He explained that as ECEC does not operate during the summer, this will create difficulty for parents who rely on Children’s campus throughout the year. Director Anderson emphasized the tripartite mission of Children’s Campus: academic research, professional training, and childcare. At its peak, Children’s Campus hosted over 1k academic observers per semester. This will be a valuable center to lose. He then noted that the city is experiencing a crisis in childcare.

 

SAEM VP Moore noted Children’s Campus observation is no longer required for student programmatic requirements. There are other options that serve this objective (ECEC being one). She noted that the best option they have is to notify affected families and give them advance time to plan.

 

Discussion was had about ECEC’s use as an observation site, the nature of communication about Children’s Campus’s closing, and additional financial data. ECEC has staff for observations. The plan as outlined aligns with Academic Affairs, and in cooperation with the Edelman Institute. It was noted that Children’s Campus has had a budget deficit going back 5 years. It was also noted that a 2021 surplus was due to receiving $400,000 HERF funds and a 2023 surplus was due to staff vacancies and reduced head teacher per classroom. In order to keep running, Children’s Campus would need support of about $2.5 million a year. It is essential that enrollments increase. Children’s Campus cannot survive without being expanded to welcome members of the city community (and not just serve the campus). Compared to other childcare services available to community families, this is a very affordable service.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sen. Wolf emphasized the importance of making available academic observation opportunities. Students have experienced trouble finding observation hours with ECEC. Students who need credentialing need to be considered.

 

 

 

• Adjournment

 

Chair Wilson adjourned the meeting at 3:57pm.

 

• Reception to welcome new senators hosted by the Provost will occur immediately after the senate adjourns

 

 

Ryan Gurney

Secretary

 

Attendance

 

 

 

 

Absent

 

 

 

 

Guests