CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 1:45 p.m.
on Friday, February 12, 1999, by Chair Gene Dinielli.
ROLL CALL: Senators and alternates (*) attending the meeting were:
(Bakersfield) Jacquelyn Kegley, John Tarjan; (Chico) Samuel Edelman, Paul
Spear; (Dominguez Hills) Hal Charnofsky, Dick Williams; (Fresno) James Highsmith,
Lester Pincu; (Fullerton) Bill Meyer, Barry Pasternack, Sandra Sutphen*;
(Hayward) Judith Stanley, Don Wort; (Humboldt) Elmo Moore; (Long Beach)
Gene Dinielli, David Hood; (Los Angeles) Marshall Cates; (Maritime Academy);
(Monterey Bay) J. Ken Nishita; (Northridge) Lynne Cook, Michael Reagan,
Gerald Resendez; (Pomona) Rochelle Kellner, Marvin Klein; (Sacramento) Cristy
Jensen, Louise Timmer; (San Bernardino) Walter Oliver, C. E. Tapie Rohm;
(San Diego) Ray Boddy, David DuFault, Dan Whitney; (San Francisco) Robert
Cherny, Jan Gregory; (San Jose) Timothy Hegstrom, David McNeil; (San Luis
Obispo) Reginald Gooden, Tom Hale; (San Marcos) A. Sandy Parsons; (Sonoma)
Peter Phillips; (Stanislaus) Pamela Russ, Mark Thompson; (Chancellor's Office)
During the course of the meeting the Chair introduced:
Harold Goldwhite, Faculty Trustee and Professor of Chemistry, CSU Los
Gary Hammerstrom, Acting Assistant Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs,
Terry Jones, President, California Faculty Association
Jeanne C. King, Chair, Academic Senate, CSU San Bernardino
Thomas Krabacher, Chair, Faculty Senate, CSU Sacramento
Donald Moore, Consultant, Association of California State University
Professors; Emeritus and Retired Faculty Association (non-voting delegate)
Sam Strafaci, Senior Director, Human Resources, Chancellors Office
Johnetta Anderson, Technical Assistant, Chancellors Office
Deborah Hennessy, Executive Director, Academic Senate CSU
José Lopez, Clerical Assistant, Academic Senate CSU
Reta Martin, Staff AssistantBudget, Academic Senate CSU
Margaret Price, Assistant to Executive Director, Academic Senate CSU
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS
REPORT OF CHAIR GENE DINIELLI
When the contract tentative agreement was arrived at, there were some
fact sheets that came from both parties. The language in the fact sheets
interested the Executive Committee to a point where we asked representatives
from both parties to meet with the Executive Committee to try to explain
the use of such language as "systemwide criteria." David DuFault,
as official CFA liaison to the Senate, came to the Executive Committee as
did Sam Strafaci. Also present was Dave Spence. In that meeting we raised
questions about HEERA, the ownership of criteria and standards, a lookthanks
to Jim Highsmithat the history of in-scope and out-of-scope
of criteria and standards, the result of which was that both parties agreed
that criteria and standards would be taken out of scope and given back to
the Academic Senate CSU. We moved very fast. We asked for a small committee
to help inform the Senate as it tries to meet outer imposed deadlines. Both
parties want to know about the disposition of our study proposal of criteria
and standards by the 21st of this month so that both parties can consider
what the Senate has or has not donethats up to the bodybefore
Although, some people might contest this, the general view was that four
years ago, both parties agreed that there would not be enough time to send
the matter of criteria and standards to the Academic Senate and, in effect,
took it out of scope in place of in scope. The argumentwell
received by both parties, I might addmade in front of them a
week ago was, under HEERA, criteria and standards rightfully belongs with
the Senate. Agreeing to that, they also said that time was of the essence,
and so forth. As Ray Boddy said, we have a victory but we cant savor
it. Before you today is the proposal of the subcommittee that was created
by the Executive Committee. The subcommittee has three people in it, two
former members of our own Merit Pay Task ForceSenators Whitney
and Charnofskyand our Immediate Past Chair, Jim Highsmith. What
they have come up with will come before you or probably has come before
you, as a floor resolution. The body, of course, will decide what
it will do and may even deal with the larger questions about whether we
have time to be responsible.
The resolution sets up criteria, gives the campus senates the role in
setting standards, continues the responsibility that the statewide Academic
Senate has in terms of criteria and standards, and proposes a review of
this approach towards criteria and standards; moves criteria and standards
out from under any kind of negotiable on-the-table item and places them
under the Senate. The resolution proposes to provide substitute language
for 31.14, which is part of the tentative agreement, found on the third
page of the resolution.
* * * * *
AS-2438-99/FLOOR/ CRITERIA AND STANDARDS FOR FACULTY
CHARNOFSKY, MERIT INCREASES
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University
adopt and urge the Chancellor and Board of Trustees to adopt the following
criteria and standards for Faculty Merit Increases (provided in Article
31 of the Unit 3 MOU) as applicable to the increases granted effective
July 1, 1998, and July 1, 1999. The Academic Senate CSU shall reexamine
the criteria and standards for Faculty Merit Increase cycles effective
July 1, 2000, and thereafter following its evaluation of the effectiveness
of the Spring 1999 campus processes.
Teaching is at the center of any system of merit increases. Faculty
Merit Increases may be granted for:
the quality of the unit member's teaching alone;
teaching and scholarship;
teaching and service to the University and community; or
teaching, scholarship, and service to the University and community.
Faculty unit employees whose work assignments do not encompass all the
criteria (e.g., lecturers, coaches, department chairs, librarians) shall
be eligible for Faculty Merit Increases on the basis of their performance
in their particular work assignments.
Teaching is broad and inclusive. Teaching encompasses instruction and
such activities as advising, mentoring, supervision (e.g., individual studies,
thesis direction, field supervision), and a range of contributions to improving
student learning (e.g., curriculum revision, course and program coordination,
assessment of learning outcomes, and applications of technology).
Scholarship is also broad. Scholarship includes discovery (traditionally
labeled research, especially published or presented to professional audiences),
integration (e.g., inter- or cross-disciplinary efforts), application (e.g.,
used in teaching or solving social, community, or technical problems),
and creative activity (e.g., works of art, performances).
Service to the University and community is likewise broad. Service to
the University and community includes the activity necessary to the faculty
role in shared governance of the institution (CSU and its campuses) and
activity applying the unit employee's expertise to benefit the University
and its community in general. Examples of service include significant committee
work; student outreach and retention; participation in university and community
organizations, professional associations, California Faculty Association,
and appropriate governmental boards and commissions; advancement of public
support for the University; and lectures and seminars to community groups.
Campus Senates shall immediately develop, and report to the Academic
Senate CSU, the standards of performance for implementing the criteria
RATIONALE: The Academic Senate CSU was asked by the CSU Chancellors
Office and the California Faculty Association to develop standards and
criteria for the awarding of Faculty Merit Increases consistent with the
Academic Senates responsibility under HEERA. The above standards
and criteria are developed to implement Article 31, section 31.14 of the
Unit 3 Tentative Agreement.
Senator Whitney moved (Charnofsky seconded) the resolution.
Senator Whitney moved (Spear seconded) to waive the rules to take
action on the resolution at the present meeting. Motion carried.
Senator Highsmith moved (Kegley seconded) to amend by adding clarifying
language: in the first paragraph of the Resolved clause after "adopt"
add "and urge the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees to adopt";
after "July 1, 1998" add "and July 1, 1999"; insert
"cycles" after "Merit Increase"; and change "1999"
to "2000" before "and thereafter." In the last paragraph
of the Resolved clause, add "immediately" before "develop."
In the first paragraph of the Resolved clause substitute "reexamine"
for "determine." Also add after "determined" in the
second part of the Rationale "through exercise of joint responsibility
of" before "Academic Senate CSU" and following add "and
the Board of Trustees."
Senator Cherny moved (Whitney seconded) to amend the Highsmith motion
by deleting everything in the Rationale after "Tentative Agreement."
The Highsmith amendment carried.
Senator Charnofsky requested consent to make the following change:
in the third paragraph of the Resolved clause to add "do not include
full-time teaching and tenure-track positions" in place of "are
limited." There was objection.
Senator Highsmith moved (Charnofsky seconded) to add the language
"do not encompass all the criteria" in place of "are limited."
Senator Charnofsky requested consent to make the following change:
in the fifth paragraph of the Resolved clause to add "of art"
after "works." There were no objections.
Senator Pasternack moved (Meyer seconded) to add "delivery of
instruction" after "mentoring" in the fourth paragraph in
the Resolved clause.
Senator Highsmith requested consent to retain "instruction"
but delete "delivery of" and insert it at beginning of list.
Senator Cates moved (Whitney seconded) to amend the amendment by using
the word "also" after "teaching" and before "encompasses."
Senator Hale requested consent to move "instruction and"
to follow "encompasses." The Pasternack amendment, so revised,
Senator Cherny moved (Edelman seconded) to add "to the University
community" after "service" (in both sentences) in the sixth
paragraph of the Resolved clause; to add semi-colons where needed; and add
", professional associations, California Faculty Association,"
after "community organizations."
Senator Klein requested consent to add "and the CSU," after
"institution." There were no objections.
Senator Meyer requested consent to add "and its" after "University"
wherever it appears in the resolution.
Senator Highsmith requested consent to use "and" and not
"its" throughout the resolution; and to modify the Klein amendment
to read "(CSU and its campuses)." There were no objections.
The Cherny amendment was approved.
Senator Reagan moved (Cook seconded) to add a sentence at the end
of the fourth paragraph, "The primary activities and responsibilities
of librarians, counselors, and coaches are construed as teaching within
these criteria." Senator Cherny requested consent to add "therefore"
before "construed." There were no objections.
Senator Spear moved (Charnofsky seconded) to close debate. Motion
The Reagan amendment failed.
Senator Cates moved (Gregory seconded) to delete "standards of
performance" in the sixth paragraph of the Resolved clause and replace
it with "process." Motion failed.
Senator Wort moved (Reagan seconded) to delete the parenthetical examples
from the third paragraph of the Resolved clause. Motion failed.
Senator Edelman moved (Highsmith seconded) to close debate. Motion
Senator Highsmith moved (Whitney seconded) to extend debate.
Senator Nishita moved (Rohm seconded) to add "excellence in:"
after "granted for:" in the second paragraph in the Resolved clause
and to delete the first six words in the first bullet. Motion failed.
AS-2438-99/Floor/Charnofsky/Highsmith/Whitney motion approved.
* * * * *
The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 11:45 a.m. on
Friday, February 12, 1999.
* * * * *
Approved (or corrected)
Gene L. Dinielli, Chair
Hal Charnofsky, Secretary
Margaret Price, Recording Secretary