Academic Senate of the California State University
MINUTES

Meeting of November 12, 1999
CSU Headquarters, Long Beach, CA

 

CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 1:15 p.m. on Friday, November 12, 1999, by Vice 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; (Hayward) Calvin Caplan, Don Wort; (Humboldt) Elmo Moore, Marshelle Thobaben; (Long Beach) David Hood, Patricia Roze; (Los Angeles) Marshall Cates, Rosemarie Marshall; (Maritime Academy) James Wheeler; (Monterey Bay) J. Ken Nishita; (Northridge) Michael Reagan, Gerald Resendez; (Pomona) Marvin Klein; (Sacramento) Michael Fitzgerald, Cristy Jensen; (San Bernardino) Jeanne King, Peter Schroeder; (San Diego) Ray Boddy, David Strom; (San Francisco) Eunice Aaron, Jan Gregory, Darlene Yee; (San Jose) Timothy Hegstrom, David McNeil, Bethany Shifflett; (San Luis Obispo) Reginald Gooden, Myron Hood, Timothy Kersten; (San Marcos) Dick Montanari; (Sonoma) Susan McKillop, Peter Phillips; (Stanislaus) Mark Thompson; (Chancellor's Office) David Spence.

INTRODUCTIONS

During the course of the meeting the Chair introduced:

Fumio Hamano, Chair, Electrical Engineering, CSU Long Beach

Harold Goldwhite, Faculty Trustee and Professor of Chemistry, CSU Los Angeles

Gary Hammerstrom, Assistant Vice Chancellor (Interim), Academic Affairs, CO

Susan Meisenhelder, President, California Faculty Association

Donald Moore, Consultant, Association of California State University Professors; Emeritus and Retired Faculty Association (non-voting delegate)

Deborah Hennessy, Executive Director, Academic Senate CSU

José Lopez, Staff Assistant-Documents, Academic Senate CSU

Reta Grays, Staff Assistant–Budget, Academic Senate CSU

Margaret Price, Assistant to Executive Director, Academic Senate CSU

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS

REPORT OF CHAIR GENE DINIELLI by Vice Chair Jacquelyn Kegley

First of all I want to say that I thought that the Academic Retreat at Asilomar went very, very well. It was a very good experience. It was great to hear the reports of what our different campuses are doing--the success stories--and to learn from each other. I want to thank Vince Buck and Ray Boddy for a nice job for organizing that conference. I want to thank all of you who served as recorders. I will tell you that your reports--some have already come in-- are due by November 30. Those reports will be complied, uniformly edited, by that we mean to get the same style going in all of them. Not to take out your important contributions, but to edit them so they are more uniform in style. It is my understanding that then these will be circulated back to the senators and others who were at the retreat, the administration, everyone who was involved.

Interim Committee Meetings for December 3--essentially the Executive Committee has decided to cancel that. That's always been an optional meeting but there are some committees that are going to meet: Academic Affairs will be meeting in San Francisco; TEKR will be meeting at a place to be decided; Faculty Affairs will be meeting here at the Chancellor's Office.

You have before you a number of documents. The first one that I wish to draw your attention to is Channel Islands. You have on a blue sheet a statement of a charge and notification that we are establishing a statewide senate faculty council for CSU Channel Islands. The Executive Committee has approved this charge; this is for your information. You also have a letter from Jim Highsmith and a document called "Draft Recommendations on Academic Directions for CSU Channel Islands." My understanding, Jim, is that is for information and comments. Do you wish to speak to them briefly.

Highsmith:   I don't know that everyone has a copy of it, yet. But when you do get a copy, it is a long document, back-to-back, that is a document that is being forwarded to the Senate for the Senate's review and comment. Anything that you wish to suggest about the document would certainly be taken into consideration by the group that will be working with the campus. I've already gotten some suggestions from people. For example, Ken Nishita, who has a lot of experience with developing campuses, has alerted me that the approach of having people who are regularly in contact with students but also have administrative jobs, who will also teach, creates complications that some times work to the advantage of people who would like to make mischief for the faculty. Those kinds of cautions and concerns and suggestions are very useful to the group in implementing this or in rethinking the philosophy. The philosophy, I think, you will see in the document is to try to have a campus that is as engaged as possible with its students on a regular basis. If you read through the document, you will see that there is a set of principles, extraordinary features about the campus, and a full design of the framework for campus curricular offerings at the beginning. No one knows where the campus will go eventually, but there is a suggested initial organization and programs and a set of priorities that the faculty have recommended for the development of programs there. I do want to let you know that even though we have an on-again, off-again campus there in the sense of we don't really know where we're going, whether we're going, but we think we're going to build a campus there, even though that is unclear until we get money in the budget that is assured, a lot of work is being done right now which will determine the character of the campus. If we are not involved now as the faculty of the system taking ownership of our newest campus, things will happen that we will not like. Thank you and I look forward to whatever the Senate has to say about the document.

Kegley: So we urge your reading of the document and your comments. The Executive Committee discussed the Senate faculty council referred to and we have recommended appointments and that will be established as soon as we have confirmation from the people that we wish to appoint. We're not announcing those appointments today because we still need some affirmative answers from some people but that council is to be established immediately.

You also have before you a document called "Draft - Working Together: A Strategic Plan for the CSU Libraries," that has been referred by the Executive Committee to the Academic Affairs Committee. If you have concerns regarding that document, please address them to the Academic Affairs Committee. You also received the new accountability process document. That will be an action item before the Board of Trustees this next week. Faculty affairs committee has declined to make any response on that and I will let Tim Kersten speak to that when it comes time for his report. You recall that Executive Vice Chancellor David Spence reported at the retreat that he had taken into account "95 percent of campus responses" but you have the document including the timeline. I also am to report to you that there was a consultant hired by the Chancellor's Office to review the structure of technology commissions with the objective to bring order and organization to those commissions while aligning all of them under the office of Academic Affairs. That consultant has made recommendations and my understanding is that CLRIT and probably other of those commissions will disappear and there will be appointed an academic technology committee or commission. There will be faculty on that and we are not clear at the moment if the CLRIT people will be transferred or how that will be handled. My understanding is that CLRIT will not be meeting in the future.

* * * * *

Standing Committee Reports:

Fiscal and Governmental Affairs Committee On behalf of FGA committee, Chair Shifflett thanked Senator Fitzgerald for the excellent orchestration of our first visit to Sacramento this academic year. The legislative offices to be visited are Poochegian, Lempert, Runner, Scott, Brulte, O'Connell, Villaraigosa, Romero, Lowenthal, and Schiff. In addition, meetings are planned with Fuentes-Michel (Assistant Secretary for higher ed) and AG Block (editor of the California Journal). Last, Shifflett asked all senators to complete the form distributed regarding participation in this spring's legislative days.

TEKR Vice Chair Hegstrom reported that the Committee on Teacher Education and K-12 Relations met to discuss the following: (1) Its oversight of CalStateTEACH, (2) the status of integrated (blended) teacher credentialing programs in the CSU, (3) the proposal from the systemwide deans of education schools for common admissions standards, and (4) consideration of TEKR's resolution: Extent of Permissible Teacher Education Coursework Transferable from the Community Colleges.

Faculty Compensation Task Force Chair Ray Boddy reported that the three faculty members of the Compensation Task Force (Boddy, Highsmith, King) have completed the first stage, are ready to submit, by way of Chair Dinielli, their draft report to the other members of the Task Force. We look forward to working with the entire Task Force.

GE Advisory Committee Ken Nishita reported that the GE Advisory Committee met on November 11, 1999. He also reported that a Conference for Assessing General Education Learning Outcomes is being planned for March 16-17, 2000, by a planning committee convened by Lorie Roth.

There was a discussion of issues from the Intersegmental General Education Transfer Curriculum (IGETC) Implementation Committee. The IGETC Implementation Committee agreed to "back date" approval of new courses submitted in the fall, but offered the previous spring when approval is confirmed by the GE Course Review Subcommittee. There is a concern that there is no process for challenging courses already on the approved list. Many of these courses were never reviewed and were "grandfathered" from the early UC Transfer Core Curriculum. The GE Advisory Committee recommended resolving the specific course issues that are in question by working with individual campuses to address concerns from the four-year institutions. The committee also suggested monitoring whether there are recurring problems and whether there are patterns in the courses being challenged. ICAS will be reconsidering whether an explicit course prerequisite of Intermediate Algebra is necessary for a course to be acceptable in Area 2; the committee was open to allowing an Area 2 course to have as an alternative prerequisite a satisfactory score on an appropriate placement examination, such as the MDPT.

There was a discussion of two issues related to the use of Advanced Placement (AP) Examinations for General Education-Breadth certification. The CSU has customarily considered all forms of history to be under the umbrella category of Social Sciences; whereas, in comparison, the UC has considered all forms of history to be in the Humanities. IGETC and CSU GE-Breadth will now accept the placement of History courses in either area or both areas. The GE Advisory Committee recommended that credit for the AP Examination in History may be used for either GE area as determined by the certifying institution. The English Council of the CSU has requested that the CSU consider raising the minimum score from "3" to "4" on the AP Examination in English language and literature and the AP Examination in English language and composition for credit to be granted for completion of the written composition requirement. The GE Advisory Committee recommended that the CSU conduct a study that includes the appropriate collection and analysis of empirical data and ensures that the minimum AP score represents a level of achievement comparable to that of a student earning a "C" in a CSU freshman-level English composition course.

There was a discussion of an issue related to the use of "Credit for Basic Training in the Military Service." Some California Community Colleges (CCC) have been awarding 3 units of credit for CSU Breadth Area E, Lifelong Understanding and Self-Development, to veterans for "basic training in the military service." It was recommended that CSU Chancellor's Office staff collect information on the instruction provided and submit it for review to the GE Subcommittee so that the Subcommittee can determine whether this practice should or should not be acceptable for any certifying institution."

There was a discussion on an issue related to mandatory prerequisites to courses in Area B4. The committee considered a mathematics course from an independent institution that was accepted, apparently through an oversight, without a stated prerequisite of Intermediate Algebra. The committee recommended that the college either establish the prerequisite explicitly in the course description or withdraw the course from the GE Breadth certification list.

There was a discussion on the progress for the review of courses certified to meet the United States History, Constitution, and American Ideals ("American Institutions") Requirements. Jo Service proposed a process for the review of the American Institutions patterns and courses submitted by the CCCs in mid-April 1999. It was recommended that the CSU staff reviewers proceed with a pre-review screening process. It was also recommended that the CSU staff reviewers identify particular case examples (both "marginal examples" and "exemplary examples") in order to begin "calibration training" for the faculty GE Course Review Subcommittee as it begins its review. Early this year, the committee requested an augmentation of the GE Course Review Subcommittee with faculty in history, political science, and ethnic studies. [These appointments were announced by the Academic Senate CSU Executive Committee shortly after adjournment of the General Education Advisory Committee meeting: Frank Stites, San Diego State; Malik Simba, CSU Fresno; Ted Anagnoson, CSU Los Angeles.] Appointment of an additional faculty member by the Academic Senate CCC is pending. It is hoped that the first meeting of the GE Subcommittee for Course Review will occur at the end of January 2000. It was urged that the calendar schedule for the course review meetings be sent out as soon as possible.

The next meeting was tentatively scheduled for February 10, 2000.

Commission on the Extended University Hal Charnofsky reported that the commission met on October 29 at the San Francisco State University downtown center from 9 a.m. to 12 noon. YRO was discussed at length. Obviously this subject creates a great deal of interest and concern among the Deans of Extended University. If (and when) it is fully implemented, YRO could seriously affect the operation of Extended Education programs. Another conference on International Programs is being planned for the spring of 2000. This is becoming a yearly event. Leo Van Cleve, who has been serving as interim director of International Programs, has recently been appointed permanent director. The annual call for RFPs for extended education grants will be going out shortly, if it hasn't already arrived on the campuses.

ACTION

APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Senator Marshall moved (Shifflett seconded) approval of the agenda. The agenda was approved.

AS-2475-99/FGA COLLABORATIVE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM SECOND READING

RESOLVED: That Academic Senate of the California State University recognize that the third year of the infrastructure build-out is necessary to support the academic mission of the CSU system and for the implementation of the Collaborative Management System; and be it further

RESOLVED: That Academic Senate CSU urge the Chancellor to secure alternative funding sources in addition to current support budgets for the Collaborative Management System and for the third year of the infrastructure build-out in order to eliminate adverse effects on campuses' ability to serve the CSU's annually-increasing student enrollment; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU urge the Chancellor to fund CMS in such a way that campuses spend no greater proportion of new support budgets on information technology than they currently spend; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU urge the Chancellor to spend no greater portion of the new funding provided for additional enrollment for institutional support including administrative information technology than the appropriate portion that would otherwise be spent for institutional support.

RATIONAL: CMS funding can have negative impact on the academic mission of campuses. Since academic affairs makes up the bulk of every campus budget, the funding for CMS is affecting those budgets. In essence on many campuses the cost of CMS has reduced the benefit campuses might have seen from increased student enrollment funds.

In addition, the third year of the infrastructure build-out is not funded at this time. Without funding for this third phase, eight campuses are at risk of not being fully integrated into the infrastructure.

While we generally see the benefit of CMS, much of CMS cannot happen until the infrastructure build-out is completed. Coordination and oversight must be integrated for a better end result.

The administration should spend no more on CMS in the long term than the funds CSU is already spending on Administrative Information Technology. The administration should use no more of the new enrollment monies than would be regularly used for administrative activities.

We believe that these efforts will go a great distance in mitigating any negative impact of CMS on the campuses.

AS-2475-99/FGA motion was withdrawn.

AS-2476-99/FGA FUNDING FOR TECHNOLOGY ACTION

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University recognize that funding, from sources other than current academic program budgets, for technology projects such as the infrastructure build out and the Collaborative Management System, is necessary for the CSU system to maintain and enhance the quality of its educational programs; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU urge the Chancellor to secure adequate funding to support the CSU's technology needs without adversely affecting campuses' ability to serve the CSU's annually increasing student enrollment; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU particularly urge the Chancellor to secure alternative funding sources for the Collaborative Management System and for the third year of infrastructure build out.

RATIONALE: Technology funding (most recently CMS) can negatively affect academic programs. Since academic affairs makes up the majority of every campuses' budget, funding technology projects from existing budgets quite likely results in considerable constraints being placed on the much needed growth and development of academic programs.

In the case of CMS, while we generally see the potential benefits, much hinges on the completion of the infrastructure build out yet the source of funding for the third phase is unclear. If the source becomes an internal re-allocation of existing resources, academic programs would most likely suffer considerably under the combined pressure of both CMS and the infrastructure build out on their budgets.

Senator Shifflett moved (Highsmith seconded) the resolution.

Senator Myron Hood moved (Cates seconded) to amend by adding a third resolved clause: "That the Academic Senate CSU particularly urge the Chancellor to secure alternative funding sources for the Collaborative Management System." Senator Edelman requested consent to make the following change: to add at the end, "and for the third year of infrastructure build out." There were no objections. Motion approved.

Senator Meyer moved (Wort seconded) to add after "technology projects such as" a comma and "computer laboratories and studios, libraries,". Motion failed.

Senator Pincu moved (Highsmith seconded) to suspend the rules [that limit discussion to three pro and three con responses] in order to hear more "con" responses. Motion approved.

Senator Shifflett moved (Kaiser seconded) to close debate on Meyer amendment. Motion approved.

Meyer amendment failed.

AS-2476-99/FGA motion approved.

AS-2477-99/FAC OWNERSHIP OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ACTION

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University reaffirm that ownership of a faculty member's lecture notes or materials resides with the faculty member; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU recognize that course notes taken by students may not fall within the ownership of a faculty member; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU encourage all CSU faculty to include a copyright symbol, ©, on all original materials, including those posted to the Web; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate CSU request that campus senates notify all faculty that the CSU General Counsel can be consulted by faculty members who claim to be damaged by the unauthorized dissemination and/or use of their intellectual property.

Senator Kersten moved (Wort seconded) the resolution.

Senator Edelman moved (Kaiser seconded) to delete resolved clauses two, three, and four; add a new resolved clause two: "That the Academic Senate CSU encourage all CSU faculty to include a brief statement regarding their position on intellectual property in their syllabi."

Senator Buck moved (Shifflett seconded) to refer back to committee. Motion approved.

AS-2477-99/FAC motion was referred to committee.

AS-2478-99/TEKR   EXTENT OF PERMISSIBLE TEACHER EDUCATION COURSEWORK TRANSFERABLE FROM THE COMMUNITY COLLEGES SECOND READING

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University recommend to the California State University Board of Trustees a change in Title 5, 40409, s.s. b., to permit campuses to allow up to 6 semester units of teacher preparation to be transferred from a community college.

RATIONALE: The CSU deans of education have recommended a change in Title 5, 40409, s.s. b, which would allow up to six semester units of teacher preparation to be transferred from a community college. The current policy allows one course to be transferred. That policy was established when the sole route to a credential was a bachelor's degree followed by postgraduate courses toward the credential. The CSU Board of Trustees has suggested that campuses investigate the potential for earlier classroom experience and pedagogical preparation. Trustee policy and S.B. 2042 have led CSU campuses to initiate "blended" programs leading to the multiple subjects credential. Such programs allow the student to be active as a teacher aide or tutor during the first two years of college work. Without this change in system policy, students interested in teaching who begin college work at a community college are disadvantaged by the one course limit compared to students who matriculate as freshman. Permitting six units of community college involvement in early field experience or coursework might encourage more students to begin teacher preparation and credential programs.

Senator Hegstrom moved (Williams seconded) the resolution.

AS-2478-99/TEKR motion was approved.

* * * * *

The Vice Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 3:25 p.m. on Friday, November 12, 1999.

* * * * *

Approved (or corrected)

Date:________________________

 

_______________________________

Gene L. Dinielli, Chair

 

_______________________________

Les Pincu, Secretary

 

________________________________

Margaret Price, Recording Secretary



 
Academic Senate Home | Calendar | Search Resolutions | Contact Us | Helpful Links