CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 10:50 a.m. on Thursday, January 18, 2001, by Chair Jacquelyn Kegley.
ROLL CALL: Senators and alternates (*) attending the meeting were: (Bakersfield) Jacquelyn Kegley, John Tarjan; (Chico) Samuel Edelman, Kathleen Kaiser; (Dominguez Hills) Hal Charnofsky, Dick Williams; (Fresno) James Highsmith, Lester Pincu; (Fullerton) Vincent Buck, Bill Meyer, Barry Pasternack; (Hayward) Calvin Caplan, Don Wort; (Humboldt) Robert Snyder; (Long Beach) Gene Dinielli, David Hood, Patricia Rozée; (Los Angeles) Frederick Anderson, Marshall Cates; (Maritime Academy); (Monterey Bay) J. Ken Nishita, Robert van Spyk; (Northridge) Lynne Cook, Michael Reagan, Barbara Swerkes; (Pomona) Rochelle Kellner, Marvin Klein; (Sacramento) Cristy Jensen, Thomas Krabacher, Louise Timmer; (San Bernardino) Buckley Barrett, Jeanne King; (San Diego) Ray Boddy, Brent Rushall; (San Francisco) Eunice Aaron, Robert Cherny, Jan Gregory; (San Jose) Timothy Hegstrom, David McNeil, Bethany Shifflett; (San Luis Obispo) Reginald Gooden, Myron Hood, Timothy Kersten; (San Marcos) Dick Montanari, A. Sandy Parsons; (Sonoma) Susan McKillop, Peter Phillips; (Stanislaus) Fred Hilpert, Mark Thompson; (Chancellor's Office) David Spence.
During the course of the meeting the Chair introduced:
Alex Arteaga, Director of Governmental Relations, California State Student Association
Roger Eagleton, Vice Chair, External Relations, California State Student Association
Harold Goldwhite, Faculty Trustee and Professor of Chemistry, CSU Los Angeles
Charles Lindahl, Associate Vice Chancellor, Academic Affairs, Chancellor's Office
Shaun Lumachi, Chair, California State Student Association
Sandy Miskella, Director of University Relations, California State Student Association
Donald Moore, Consultant, Association of California State University Professors;
Emeritus and Retired Faculty Association (non-voting delegate)
David Spence, Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Academic Officer, CSU
Bill Wilson, Director, CSU TeacherNet, Chancellor's Office
Beverly Young, Associate Director, CSU TeacherNet, Chancellor's Office
Deborah Hennessy, Executive Director, Academic Senate CSU
Margaret Price, Assistant to Executive Director, Academic Senate CSU
Shirley Sparkman, Staff Assistant-Budget, Academic Senate CSU
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS
REPORT OF CHAIR JACQUELYN ANN K. KEGLEY
Visit to CSU, San Marcos- November 14
On Tuesday, November 14th, I had the pleasure of visiting CSU, San Marcos in the company of Faculty Trustee Harold Goldwhite and Trustee Ralph Pesqueira. President Alexander Gonzalez and Senate Chair Gerardo Gonzalez were very generous hosts. We had an informative lunch with President Gonzales and Academic Vice President Patricia Worden. After a tour of the campus including a report on plans for capital development, there was a meeting with the Executive Committee of the Senate. Issues discussed included YRO, the Master Plan discussion in the Senate, faculty workload issues and FMIs. There was also a general meeting with faculty. The discussion ranged over a number of topics including YRO, student preparation, faculty workload, and accountability. One theme expressed at this meeting was the concern that the sense of uniqueness for the campus hoped for by faculty at a new campus not be lost in the coming years as the campus continues to develop.
Meeting with the Campus Senate Chairs- November 30
On November 30, 2000, there was a very productive meeting of the campus senate chairs held at the CSU Chancellor's Office. The Chairs met separately from 10:00 a.m. until noon. During that time the chairs shared common concerns and generated an intent to develop two resolutions to come to the Academic Senate CSU. One resolution will deal with CMS and possible negative impacts on the campus academic affairs budget. Another concerns an additional accountability criteria or measure on campus shared governance.
Campus senate chairs have also been asked to submit at least one anecdote/case example/best practice description of an incidence on their campus where shared governance worked well. If there is not a best practice example to share, then a "worst practice example" will be shared with a description of what should have happened in a model shared governance environment.
During the joint meeting of the campus senate chairs with the statewide Senate's Executive Committee and committee chairs, there was a very informative session with Bill Knight, CSU Office of the General Counsel. The discussion focused on the California Public Records Act, Brown Act and the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act. These bills address public meetings and the public accessibility of budget information. The discussion was very useful concerning what budgetary information is considered public, and at what point in time does it become public information. There was also discussion of when and who may be excluded from senate meetings. In addition, there was an overview of Assembly Bill 1773 (Romero, Chapter 574, approved September 22, 2000). That bill prohibits "any business, agency or person from preparing, causing to be prepared, giving, selling, transferring, or otherwise distributing or publishing any contemporaneous recording of an academic presentation." Gary Hammerstrom will be preparing material for the Chancellor's Office on this bill and will share this with the Academic Senate CSU who will, in turn, share it with the campus senates.
Meeting with the Board of the CSSA- Sonoma State University- December 2
Friday, December 1, I was able to join members of the CSSA Board at its meeting at Sonoma State University. In addition, to some excellent fellowship, this was an opportunity to be informed about student concerns as well as to let the student group know the present issues and concerns before the Academic Senate CSU. My theme was "working together" on common issues, including joint advocacy with legislators. Two items before the CSSA are already of interest to the Senate, namely, a concern with CMS and costs to the campuses and Globalization/International Education. Campus senate chairs are working on a resolution on CMS that they will bring to the Senate in the near future. Like the students, they are very concerned about the impact of CMS costs on campus budgets, particularly on the academic affairs side of the budget. The students also are interested in advocating for additional monies from the legislature for CMS. In discussing this issue, the Senate should take both of these positions into consideration. The Senate does have a faculty work group on International Education, of which Senate Vice Chair David McNeil is a member. I have asked Vice Chair McNeil to work with the CSSA on the concern with globalization and international education. Finally, the CSSA is committed to working with the Senate on possible joint advocacy on a number of issues with the legislature; we will be meeting them to discuss this possibility.
Meeting of Faculty Council, CSU Channel Islands, - December 7-8
On Thursday and Friday, December 7-8, I was able to join the Faculty Council of California State University, Channel Islands on which I serve as an ex-officio member. The group had a heavy working agenda. A major amount of time was spent on developing the first academic plan for the university to be submitted to the Chancellor's Office and Board of Trustees. The group also worked on a General Education Program, a statement of Academic Freedom, and on the WASC accreditation timeline. The group was joined on Thursday afternoon by colleagues from Moorpark and Oxnard Community Colleges to share information about a visit to Evergreen College to hear more about learning communities. The council is also collecting nominations for Search Groups for new faculty positions and for consultants to help in further program development. There will be a training session for search groups on January 25. Recall that CSUCI has initiated an online application and search process. This experimental undertaking has taken much work by many persons at the campus and on the council. I look forward to a report from the Faculty Council on this process, its successes and difficulties, so that we all might benefit from this experiment.
Meeting with CFA Board and Presidents' Council- LAX- December 8
On Friday evening, December 8, I was invited to attend a session of the CFA Board and Presidents' Council. I was able to listen to the report on and discussion of the "Future of the CSU Agenda" final draft. This document is perceived by CFA as a vision statement to be used to guide both their bargaining and legislative agenda. During his report Jeff Lustig particularly noted his concern not to tread on the turf of the Academic Senate CSU. After this report and discussion I was graciously asked by Susan Meisenhelder to address the group. I thanked them for their willingness to be in dialogue and urged that we work cooperatively on items of common concern. I expressed appreciation for their sensitivity to the different "turf's" of the Senate and the CFA. I then reported on our working document, "The CSU and the California Master Plan at the Beginning of the 21st Century." I argued that we are addressing some of the same issues covered in the future document, but that we were doing so under the rubric of Senate concerns for the quality of the curriculum and academic matters. The group was very enthusiastic about the master plan document and even wanted to "vote support." I reminded them that this was a draft document that still needed Senate and campus discussion. I did promise to share the draft document with them, once it was appropriate. A CFA Board member summed up the overall theme of the discussion: "This is the faculty speaking with two different faces, but as one."
Meeting of Workload Task Force -San Francisco - January 5
A very productive meeting of the Workload Task Force was held in San Francisco on January 5. The Task Force is composed of four Senate representatives (Jan Gregory, David Hood, Myron Hood and Jackie Kegley); four CFA representatives (Judith Little, Jo Bell Whitlatch, Jane Kerlinger, and Dan Cornford); three Provosts (Tom Labelle, Paul Zingg and Scott McNall). The three representatives from the Chancellor's Office are David Spence, Jackie McClain and Gary Hammerstrom. Richard Serpe, CSU San Marcos, who did the 1990 CSU Faculty Workload Study, joined the group to discuss the possibility of a new study building on the 1990 undertaking. In my judgment, two very important actions occurred.
First, it was unanimously agreed by all that this undertaking would be a genuine collaborative effort with no party veto of concerns of another party. The study was to be viewed as useful for various purposes and as a base for improving support, resources and, if necessary, reward systems, so that faculty can accomplish their new tasks more effectively and with satisfaction. The concern of the study is to discover what faculties actually are doing, how they feel about these tasks and the kinds of needs they have to make their activities more fruitful and worthwhile.
The second important outcome of the meeting was the construction of a survey that would address new issues and will be useful to all parties. It was agreed that the 1990 survey would be augmented to accomplish this. The section on department chairs will be eliminated and the section of part-time, temporary faculty will be much expanded. New questions will address changing pedagogies and role. The survey will do a comparison of CSU with comparable institutions, but the CSU portion will be the first focus. This section will be ready for spring. The comparison portion will be projected for fall 2001 and the Task Force will address the issues of types of comparison institutions at a future time. The final report should be available by January 2002. The group made great progress and I look forward to the results of this undertaking.
* * * * *
STANDING COMMITTEE REPORTS:
Fiscal and Governmental Affairs Committee On behalf of the FGA committee, Chair Shifflett reported that the committee discussion included:
- Work of the master plan committee. The perception is that work on this is slow going. The focus this year will be on workgroups. The joint committee will then deal with these reports in 2002.
- FGA visit to Sacramento in early February. Issues we're interested in beyond budget include efforts to take out the sunset clause in the statute related to our ability to directly pay vendors and AB 16 (and whatever senate counterpart emerges) related to a public facilities bond act for education. In addition to visits with members of the assembly and senate, some of the members of FGA will sit in on the higher ed hearing on Teacher prep.
Chair Shifflett concluded with a reminder to get information to her regarding senators' availability to participate in the ASCSU legislative day. She encouraged those with a conflict to consult with the rest of their delegation to try to insure that at least one representative from their campus would participate.
Faculty Trustee Harold Goldwhite Preview of the Board of Trustees' Agenda Meeting January 23-24, 2001
The Board of Trustees will meet at system headquarters on January 23 and 24, 2001. Here are some of the most significant agenda items for the Board and its committees at that meeting.
The subcommittee of the Committee on Finance on the development of a National Sports Complex at CSU Dominguez Hills will meet at 8:30 a.m. on January 23 to receive information on the status of final negotiations, and will hear a detailed plan for the location and conceptual design of the complex.
The Ad Hoc Committee on off-campus facilities will meet at 9:00 a.m. on January 23 to hear a conceptual plan for moving the Mission Viejo off-campus center of CSU Fullerton to the former Marine Corps Air Station at El Toro.
The Committee on Collective Bargaining will meet in open session to hear comments and will then move to closed session as usual.
The Committee on Policy's first session will be closed to consider recommendations for honorary degrees.
Tuesday afternoon will begin with the Committee on Audit which will hear reports and also decide on the functions to be reviewed in calendar year 2001.
The Committee on Finance will get a status report on the 2001/2 support budget. The Governor's budget proposal, released last week, honors the partnership agreements and projects a 3% enrollment increase. It includes a 4% compensation increase for faculty and staff. About half of the money the CSU requested above the agreement as State Investments is included in the Governor's budget. The CSU management is pledged to lobby the Governor and the legislature vigorously for those items not funded in the Governor's proposal which include the extra 2% in compensation; the support for faculty housing; and the graduate conversion. The Committee will also act on a number of property development proposals including a classroom and office complex, and a campus housing and retail village project at San Jose; the Los Angeles Unified School District Academy High School at Northridge; the International Polytechnic High School at Pomona; and an Internet Switching Center at Hayward.
The Committee on Educational Policy, in open session, will hear the 5th Annual report on remediation. Although the data are not in the agenda I understand that the percentage of entering freshmen needing remediation in mathematics declined again, while that in English remained constant. There will also be a presentation in the series Recognition of Outstanding Teaching, Research and Scholarship on the M.A. in Multimedia at CSU Hayward.
The Committee on University and Faculty Personnel will consider action to make Cesar Chavez Day, March 31, a paid holiday for CSU employees, subject to bargaining for represented employees.
The Committee on Governmental Relations will adopt, as it does annually, a statement of legislative principles and will hear the initial report on the 2001/2 legislative session.
The Committee on Campus Planning Building and Grounds will hear the status report on the 2001/2 state-funded capital outlay program as it appears in the Governor's budget. A preliminary survey indicates that essentially the whole of the CSU's request, which is limited by the available bond funding, was supported by the Governor. The committee will also be asked to endorse schematic plans for CSU Channel Islands housing; the Western Center for Adaptive Aquatics at Northridge; and an Internet Switching Center at Hayward.
The Committee on Institutional Advancement will consider naming requests for facilities at Stanislaus, San Bernardino, and San Luis Obispo, and a program at San Luis Obispo. The full Board will consider a resolution conferring emeritus status on Douglas Patiño, Vice Chancellor for University Advancement, who is retiring in early 2001.
For further information on any item on the Board agenda, please contact me.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: The agenda, having been moved and seconded, was approved.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The agenda, having been moved and seconded, was approved.
The agenda was re-ordered to take action on the Patiño resolution while the Vice Chancellor was in attendance. Then Item 8, AS-2523-01/FA, was moved to Item 1.
AS-2519-01/EX APPRECIATION FOR VICE CHANCELLOR DOUGLAS PATIÑO
RESOLVED: That Vice Chancellor Douglas Patiño, throughout his tenure as Vice Chancellor for University Advancement, has provided vision and collegial leadership for the California State University in strengthening advancement's increasingly important contribution to the quality of higher education in California. He has consistently given support and encouragement to the Academic Senate of the California State University, including financial support for attendance at the CSU Legislative Days and for participation in the Council for Advancement and Support of Education (CASE) and alumni/ae activities. He also sponsored the recognition of faculty accomplishments at meetings of the CSU Board of Trustees; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU express to Vice Chancellor Douglas Patiño its deepest appreciation for his outstanding service as Vice Chancellor for University Advancement and especially for his continual support of the Academic Senate CSU, the faculty, and the students of the CSU; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU wish Vice Chancellor Douglas Patiño all the very best in his retirement.
AS-2519-01/EX motion approved unanimously.
AS-2523-01/FA MERIT PAY PRINCIPLES AND FUTURE CONTRACT BARGAINING
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University (ASCSU) conclude that, in the words of the neutral fact-finder, Richard B. Danehy, the current FMI program "appears to be ill-conceived and poorly administered"; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU reaffirm its commitments to the following principles stated in the report of the Merit Pay Task Force of the ASCSU, 1999:
- No merit pay plan shall be implemented until the CPEC faculty salary gap between the CSU and comparison institutions…is eliminated through across-the-board salary increases. Competitive salaries shall be maintained through across-the-board increases.
- The purpose of merit pay shall be clearly stated.
- Merit awards shall not exceed two steps on the applicable salary schedule.
- Merit pay may be awarded in the form of bonuses, additions to base pay, or both.
- Criteria used to decide merit awards must be clear to all parties. All members of the University community must understand how merit is defined. Faculty members eligible for awards must be informed of the criteria that will be used in making decisions, and the committees or individuals who evaluate and recommend regarding merit awards must be informed about the criteria they are to use in making decisions.
- Decisions about who receives merit pay awards shall be by faculty at the department, school, or college level. Final decisions shall be made by the faculty, and individuals' due process shall be protected by the university president.
- A merit pay system must be characterized by openness. The names of those recommended, those who receive awards, and the size of the awards must be public knowledge. Reasons for denial of awards shall be communicated to those denied.
- Merit salary increases shall be awarded to individuals who demonstrate meritorious performance in one or more of the 3 recognized areas of professorial responsibility: teaching, scholarship or creative activity, and service. Awardees shall demonstrate satisfactory performance in all 3 areas. Individuals whose assignments do not include these areas shall be eligible for merit pay based on their performance in their own assignments. Determination of what constitutes meritorious and satisfactory performance shall be made by faculty on each campus. Merit pay is usually awarded to individuals, but group awards, i.e., to a program or department or team, also might be considered.
- The CSU recognizes and financially rewards merit by its system of ranks, i.e., Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, and Full Professor. Individuals are thoroughly and carefully reviewed for tenure and promotion several times during their career.
- Involvement in a merit pay system, both by those seeking awards and those determining awards, shall not require faculty to expend extraordinary amounts of time. The merit pay system should be simple and flexible, with maximum autonomy at the campus level to determine criteria and procedures.
- Persons seeking merit pay awards shall not serve on any committee involved in determining who receives awards.
- No system of merit pay shall be put into place without a fair and equitable grievance process for those denied awards.
and be it further
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU urge the Chancellor and Board of Trustees of the California State University, and the California Faculty Association, to recognize that the Retention, Tenure and Promotion (RTP) process is a merit system that has credibility with the faculty and that any further merit-based compensation program should build upon this model and adapt it to include non-tenure-track faculty.
RATIONALE: The Academic Senate of the California State University Task Force on Merit Pay, which began its work in 1997, did an independent review of existing literature on merit pay programs, and an informal survey to ascertain attitudes of CSU faculty, prior to writing its report. The ASCSU developed the following carefully crafted set of principles on which it believed any merit pay program must rest. The report of the neutral fact-finder at the end of impasse in the reopeners bargaining between CSU and CFA in 2000 corroborates much of the content of the Final Report of that task force.
AS-2523-01/FA will be a second reading item at the March 15-16, 2001, meeting.
AS-2516-01/FA URGING OUTSIDE-OF-BARGAINING ASSESSMENT OF MERIT PAY POLICIES
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University (CSU) urge the Office of the Chancellor and the California Faculty Association (CFA) to begin immediately
- an "outside of bargaining" assessment of the system's experience with merit pay and
- consultation with other CSU constituencies and experts on the goals of the merit pay systems.
These out-of-bargaining discussions should focus on such considerations as goals and outcomes in an academic setting, Academic Senate principles, fairness, workload implications, implementation costs, and faculty diversity. The process should draw upon the experiences of comparable institutions, professional literature on the goals and outcomes of merit pay policies, and include a third-party facilitator. The report resulting from these discussions should be made available to the Academic Senate CSU and to the campuses, as well as to the CFA and to the CSU administration.
AS-2516-00/FA motion approved.
AS-2517-01/AA COOPERATION BETWEEN CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY AND CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTY TO IMPROVE STUDENT TRANSFER PROCEDURES
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University (CSU) recognize the importance of improving procedures for the transfer of students from the California Community Colleges (CCC) campuses to those of the CSU; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU support active cooperation between faculty of the CSU and the CCC to improve student transfer procedures; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU acknowledge the Memorandum of Understanding of May 8, 2000, between the chancellors of the CSU and the CCC on improving the effectiveness of transfer procedures of students from CCC campuses to CSU campuses; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU look forward to an active and collegial role in future efforts to improve student transfer procedures.
RATIONALE: The California Master Plan for Higher Education places a high priority on accommodating eligible CCC transfer students to CSU. Nearly 47,744 students transferred to the CSU from California Community Colleges during 1999-2000, compared to slightly more than 36,688 who entered the CSU as first-time freshmen and 9,657 who transferred from other institutions (some of whom also transferred credits from a community college). Thus, a very significant percentage of CSU students transfer college credits from a CCC campus, even though only a very small percentage of CCC students transfer to CSU in any given year. (For example, CPEC data for Fall 1999 indicate that there were 1,400,954 students enrolled in the CCC, compared to 30,447 who transferred from a CCC campus to a CSU campus and 8,696 to a UC campus.) The expediting of student transfers from CCC to CSU involves complex and multi-layered issues, and many of those issues link directly to faculty responsibilities for curriculum, academic advising, and assessment of student performance in both systems. On May 8, 2000, Charles B. Reed, Chancellor of the California State University system, and Thomas J. Nussbaum, Chancellor of the California Community Colleges system, signed a Memorandum of Understanding (see attachment) on improving the effectiveness of transfer procedures, to be in effect through June 30, 2003; the memorandum involved limited prior consultation with CSU or CCC academic senates.
AS-2517-01/AA motion approved.
AS-2518-01/AA COMMENDATION FOR CSU TRUSTEE STANLEY T. WANG
WHEREAS, California State University Trustee Stanley T. Wang has recently given the CSU $1.2 million to fund a ten-year program that will provide 200 scholarships for CSU students and 40 stipends for CSU faculty members for the purpose of study, teaching, and research in China, specifically,
- Each year during the program, the Wang Family Scholarship will provide ten, $4,000, one-semester student scholarships to be used for travel and study at the National Taiwan University or the National Tsinghua University and ten similar scholarships for use at universities in the People's Republic of China, and
- Each year during the program, the fund will provide an annual $10,000 faculty stipend for research and teaching at National Taiwan University and another one for use at the National Tsinghua University and two similar stipends for use at universities in the People's Republic of China; and
WHEREAS, Two years ago, Trustee Stanley T. Wang gave the CSU system $1 million to create a ten-year program to recognize CSU faculty members and administrators who, through extraordinary commitment and dedication, have distinguished themselves by exemplary contributions and achievements in their academic disciplines and areas of assignment, specifically, to provide each year awards of $20,000 each to four CSU faculty members and one administrator; therefore be it
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University express its high regard for Trustee Stanley T. Wang and his family and its warmest appreciation for
- their generosity toward the students, faculty members, and administrators of the California State University,
- their dedication to fostering international educational and scholarly experiences for CSU students and faculty members, and
- their commitment to recognizing exemplary contributions and achievements by CSU faculty members and administrators.
AS-2518-01/AA approved by acclamation.
AS-2520-01/FGA IN SUPPORT OF SCR 2: COLLEGE AWARENESS MONTH (ALPERT) (FEBRUARY 2001)
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University express its appreciation to the legislature for its support for public higher education and support of Senate Concurrent Resolution 2: College Awareness Month (Alpert) (February 2001); and be it further
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU thank Senator Alpert for her ongoing support of education and sponsorship of SCR 2.
AS-2520-01/FGA motion approved unanimously.
AS-2521-01/TEKR REPORTING RANKINGS OF TEACHER EDUCATION PROGRAMS AS REQUIRED BY TITLE II
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University (ASCSU) urge the Chancellor to request the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CCTC) to include, in any publication of teacher education program rankings, sufficient program data to provide a proper context for the information.
RATIONALE: Title II of the Higher Education Reauthorization Act requires that all states report the quality of their teacher preparation programs based on assessments of the performance of the program graduates. These reports are to be published in a state report card that indicates the performance quartile of each program's student passing rate.
The federal requirement specifies that only measures common to all state programs may be used. In California, the Reading Instruction Competence Assessment (RICA) is the only measure that meets this requirement. RICA is required of all of multiple subject and special education certification candidates in California's 80+ teacher education programs. Based on each institution's student "pass rate" on this single test, programs will be given a quartile ranking and that quartile placement will be reported nationally and throughout the state. In addition, each program may elect to write three 250-word descriptive narratives regarding program elements.
There are a number of problems with using this one measure as the sole indicator of quality. The range of scores in each quartile is extremely narrow. It is estimated for example, that a 90% passing rate would place a program in the third quartile. Reporting the RICA passing rates by quartile is not particularly meaningful, and any publication of quartile rankings should be supplemented with additional data to create a meaningful context, such as the actual passing rate for each program, number of program graduates or completers, enrollments by program type, number of full and part time faculty, teacher shortages in the immediate area, and the range of scores in each quartile.
AS-2521-01/TEKR motion approved unanimously.
AS-2522-01/FLOOR (Phillips) CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY MASCOT NAMING POLICY
RESOLVED: That the California State University choose university mascot names from other than a human group.
RATIONALE: Universities choose mascot names from human groups that denote various positive qualities such as strength, dedication, and hard fightingness.
Human groups often have both positive and negative stereotypes attributed to them by other groups in society. Therefore the choosing of a university mascot based on human group characteristics can be seen as honoring either the positive or negative stereotypes of that group by others in society. The use of human group names for mascots has the potential of creating negative feelings about the group by some other segment of society.
AS-2522-01/Floor (Phillips) will be a second reading item at the March 15-16, 2001, meeting.
* * * * *
The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 1:45 p.m. on Friday, January 19, 2001.
* * * * *
Approved (or corrected)
Jacquelyn Ann K. Kegley, Chair
Les Pincu, Secretary
Margaret Price, Recording Secretary