Approved Minutes
Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate
April 20, 2011, 3:00 to 5:00 p.m.
Sibley Auditorium, Bechtel Engineering Center
Page 1 of 7
Approved Minutes
MINUTES OF MEETING1
BERKELEY DIVISION OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE
Thursday, April 20, 2011
The spring meeting of the Berkeley Division was held on Thursday, April 20, 2011, from 3:105:25 p.m. in Sibley Auditorium at the Bechtel Engineering Center, pursuant to call. Professor
Fiona Doyle (Materials Science and Engineering), chair of the Berkeley Division, presided.
Division Parliamentarian David Vogel (Business Administration) could not attend this meeting;
Professor Robert Jacobsen (Physics), Division vice chair, served on his behalf. Quorum of 50
Senate members was attained by 3:10 p.m. and the meeting was called to order.
I.
Minutes (Enclosures 1 and 2)
The minutes of the April 22, 2010 and the November 3, 2010 meetings of the Division
were presented.
ACTION: Both minutes were approved as submitted.
II.
Announcements by the President
UC President Mark Yudof was unable to attend.
III.
Other Announcements
A.
Chancellor Robert J. Birgeneau
Chancellor Birgeneau presented a campus update:
•
Rankings and honors: Rankings of institutions of higher education, both
in the U.S. and internationally, continue to rank Berkeley exceptionally
high, even during this period of fiscal challenge. The Chancellor
highlighted accomplishments of the arts and humanities faculty in
particular. Berkeley leads among institutions receiving Sloan Foundation
fellowships for outstanding junior faculty for the past 11 years. Berkeley’s
graduate programs continue to excel, with a higher than normal level of
acceptances this year.
•
Admissions: A record number of undergraduate applications was
received. The fear that increased numbers of nonresident students would
affect student diversity has not been proven so far.
•
Budget: Berkeley’s public character is threatened by the fiscal crisis, as
state funding now falls last, behind federal research funding, tuition, and
private donations. The campus is working on a range of responses to the
budget shortfall as the outlook for the state budget remains grim for the
next few years. Educating new federal legislators in the connection
between university research and the health of the nation will be a high
priority; specific examples that could be used in advocacy efforts are
needed.
•
Intercollegiate athletics (IA): The Chancellor weathered some backlash
after cutting five sports to reduce IA expenses. However, the IA budget is
now stabilized for the near term, and strong fundraising by supporters
resulted in the reinstatement of those sports. The IA budget will continue
to be monitored.
1
Recordings of Divisional Meetings are available online at http://academicsenate.berkeley.edu/meetings/meetings.html, or by appointment at the Academic Senate Office. Contact
acad_sen@berkeley.edu for more information.
Draft Minutes
Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate
April 22, 2010, 3:00 to 4:30 p.m.
Booth Auditorium, School of Law
Page 2 of 7
B.
Berkeley Division Chair Fiona Doyle
Referring to the list of memorials noticed in the agenda, Chair Doyle commended
the Committee on Memorial Resolutions and the memorials’ authors for their
efforts in producing tributes to deceased faculty.
Some positive notes this year included a partial restoration of funding, an end to
furloughs, the resumption of faculty searches, and actions taken to address the
IA deficit. The capacity of common good courses was expanded through the
efforts of the Undergraduate Enrollment Task Force, a joint Senateadministrative group, and backed by financial support from the administration.
An online instruction pilot, initiated through the UC Commission on the Future,
is moving ahead. Senate members were invited to provide input on online
education to the Committee on Educational Policy and the Committee on
Courses of Instruction. Chair Doyle thanked those who served on numerous task
forces and work groups, as well as the Senate staff.
The Senate’s Special Committee on University Governance and Leadership was
convened this year as directed by a resolution approved at the Spring 2010
Division meeting. A progress report will be made to Divisional Council on May 16.
Divisional leadership for 2011-12 was announced: Professor Robert Jacobsen
(Physics) will serve as chair, and Professor Christina Maslach (Psychology) as
vice chair. Professor Robert M. Anderson, professor of economics and
mathematics at Berkeley, will chair the systemwide Academic Senate. He has
served as Division parliamentarian and on the Committee on Faculty Welfare.
C.
IV.
Graduate Assembly Vice President for Campus Affairs Danielle Love
Graduate Assembly Vice President Danielle Love, a graduate student in the
School of Public Policy, outlined three areas of concern to graduate students in
the current fiscal climate.
•
Operational Excellence (OE): Graduate student input to the OE process
must be ensured.
•
Online education: Maintaining Berkeley quality in online courses and
online degree programs is crucial. The lack of community for graduate
students in online programs will be a great disadvantage.
•
Graduate student instructors (GSIs): Benefits decentralization could
reduce fulltime graduate student instructor (GSI) positions and the
quality of instruction. The GA supports maintenance of the current level
of GSI positions.
Special Orders-Consent Calendar
For proposed legislative amendments, additions to the current text are noted by an underline;
deletions to the current text are noted by a strikethrough line
A.
Berkeley Division Regulation 355 (Master Of Financial Engineering)
In the original proposal for the Master of Financial Engineering (MFE) degree
program, the Haas School provided text for legislation to codify requirements for
the MFE, but this language was never submitted to the Division for approval. To
remedy this omission, the School submits the following proposed regulation, as
an addition to Part II (Regulations Applicable to Candidates for Bachelor’s
Draft Minutes
Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate
April 22, 2010, 3:00 to 4:30 p.m.
Booth Auditorium, School of Law
Page 3 of 7
Degree or for the Professional Degrees or Certificates in Degree-Warding
Agencies), Title II (Walter A. Haas School of Business). Both the Committee on
Rules and Elections and Divisional Council approved the proposed regulation.
355. MASTER OF FINANCIAL ENGINEERING
The degree of Master of Financial Engineering (MFE) is granted on the
following conditions:
1. The candidates must have completed the requirements for the Bachelor’s
degree in one of the Colleges or Schools of the University of California
or at another college or university of approved standing.
2. The candidate must have completed a one-year program of graduate
study (including a summer term) as specified by the Faculty of the
Walter A. Haas School of Business and approved by the Graduate
Council.
Only courses in which the candidate is assigned grades, A, B, or C
may be counted in satisfaction of the requirements for the MFE
degree.
The candidate must maintain a “B” average (3.0 GPA) in all courses
taken during the candidate’s residence at the University of
California as a graduate student.
3. An applied quantitative finance project is required of each candidate.
ACTION: The Consent Calendar was approved as submitted.
V.
Reports of Special Committees
None
VI.
Reports of Standing Committees
A.
Committee on Admissions, Enrollment and Preparatory Education
Associate Professor Katherine Snyder (English), chair of the Committee on
Admissions, Enrollment and Preparatory Education (AEPE), presented the
committee’s update. Admit rates continued at the same percentages as last year.
Higher numbers of nonresident undergraduate students were admitted, a
strategy taken in response to the decline in state funding, to protect access for
California residents and to preserve academic quality. Student diversity seems
not to have been greatly affected, and will be closely monitored by AEPE in the
future.
Berkeley has pioneered comprehensive review, and AEPE Chair Snyder has
assisted in training sessions as the entire UC system adopts this process.
Chair Doyle also commended three former AEPE chairs for their contributions to
the development of the review procedures: Professor Calvin Moore (Mathematics),
Vice Chair Jacobsen, and Professor George Johnson (Mechanical Engineering).
B.
Committee on Rules and Elections
Associate Professor Gary Holland (Linguistics), chair of the Committee on Rules
and Elections and Division secretary, announced that 356 valid ballots were
received for the 2011 election results.
Senate members elected to the Divisional Council:
Allen Goldstein, Environmental Science, Policy, & Management
Draft Minutes
Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate
April 22, 2010, 3:00 to 4:30 p.m.
Booth Auditorium, School of Law
Page 4 of 7
Jeffrey Perloff, Agricultural & Resource Economics
Patricia Zambryski, Plant & Microbial Biology
Senate members elected to the Committee on Committees of the Berkeley
Division:
Robin Einhorn, History
Katharine Milton, Environmental Science, Policy, & Management
Robert Sharf, East Asian Languages & Cultures
Shannon Stimson, Political Science
The committee thanked all Senate members who had entered the election.
C.
Committee on Teaching (Written report only-Enclosure 3)
Three faculty selected by the Committee on Teaching were honored with the
2011 Distinguished Teaching Award: Robin L. Einhorn, Professor of History;
Phillip L. Geissler, Associate Professor of Chemistry; and Kent Puckett, Associate
Professor of English. Chair Doyle invited all to attend the award ceremony
scheduled for the following day.
D.
Committee on the Faculty Research Lecture (Written report only-Enclosure 4)
The recipients of the 2011 Faculty Research Lecture were also congratulated:
Terry Speed, Professor of Statistics, and Jan de Vries, Professor of History. They
will deliver the lectures in 2012.
VII.
Petitions of Students (None)
VIII.
Unfinished Business (None)
IX.
University and Faculty Welfare (Discussion only)
A.
Update on the campus budget
Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance John Wilton presented a
condensed version of a budget presentation previously made to the deans and
chairs. The campus has seen some success in protecting access and excellence
while facing a sharp decline in state funding; meanwhile, Berkeley’s overall
revenues have actually increased. The federal government now provides more
support to UC than the state, through funding of research, but neither entity is
stable, and the state budget is not expected to recover within the next few years.
The University will be using some reserves and will seek other sources of
funding. Structural changes are also being taken to increase efficiencies and
reduce expenses. Units will be expected to absorb some cuts. It is important for
the campus to work together during this difficult time.
B.
Update on Operational Excellence (OE)
Graduate Dean Andrew Szeri, recently appointed Program Office head for OE,
provided an update on Operational Excellence. Forty proposals are currently
under review to help increase efficiencies and reduce expenses. Restructuring
and layoffs have resulted in significant cost savings and in organizational
simplification. New administrative processes are being developed. A meeting for
the deans on implementation of the centers is planned and will address the
concerns of the Committee on Academic Planning and Resource Allocation.
C.
Progress report on the online evaluation of courses and teaching
Vice Provost for Teaching, Learning, Academic Planning and Facilities Catherine
Draft Minutes
Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate
April 22, 2010, 3:00 to 4:30 p.m.
Booth Auditorium, School of Law
Page 5 of 7
Koshland chaired a joint Senate/administrative steering committee to develop a
new online evaluation system, including new survey formats. The approach was
based on the findings of previous Senate studies on teaching evaluation and with
input from focus groups, the units, and individuals. Chair Doyle served as a
member of this committee. The results of the proposed, customizable
questionnaire are intended to help improve teaching, assist students with course
selection, and to assist communication among students about courses. However,
objections from faculty were raised about privacy, access to evaluation data, and
their validity for use in academic personnel reviews. Legal issues regarding
access remain unresolved in California, and there is a precedent for the public
disclosure of grade data as well as precedent set by sharing of evaluation data at
other UC campuses. The steering committee plans to resolve the issues raised by
the faculty through pilots of the new questionnaire formats and the online
evaluation system next year.
X.
New Business
A.
Resolution on the proposed online evaluation of courses campuswide
(Handout A)
Professor Kevin Padian (Integrative Biology & the Museum of Paleontology)
introduced a resolution on the online evaluation of courses.
Main Motion:
WHEREAS, systems of evaluating courses and instructors are not uniform and
differ across campus units in uneven and unsatisfactory ways, and
WHEREAS, Sakai (bSpace) has been proposed by the Student Services team of
Operational Excellence as the online system to be adopted to evaluate all campus
courses and instructors,1 and
WHEREAS, an online system in principle could be convenient, provide more
rapid results, save staff time, and cost less than paper systems, and
WHEREAS, currently, online evaluation systems have documented problems,
including potentially low response rates; demographic differences between
respondents and non-respondents; and the need for incentives or sanctions that
disconnect the evaluation process from the teaching and learning process and
could bias results; and
WHEREAS, the purview of evaluations of courses and instructors resides in
academic departments and the Academic Senate, and not in Operational
Excellence or Student Services,
BE IT RESOLVED that the Academic Senate supports the withdrawal of the
proposal for online evaluation of courses put forth as part of Operational
Excellence that requires campuswide adoption of an online course evaluation
system at this time, and urges that the Administration return all consideration of
campuswide course evaluation to the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs and
Faculty Welfare and to the Academic Senate.
Submitted by Professor Kevin Padian
1
See http://oe.berkeley.edu/studentservices/OnlineCourseEvalutationRequestForResourcesDRAFT.pdf
Draft Minutes
Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate
April 22, 2010, 3:00 to 4:30 p.m.
Booth Auditorium, School of Law
Page 6 of 7
Department of Integrative Biology & Museum of Paleontology
Withdrawal of the main motion by Professor Padian
Professor Padian explained that circumstances regarding the proposal for online
course evaluation had changed subsequent to the distribution of the notice, so he
wished to withdraw the main motion.
Substitute motion presented by Professor Padian
Professor Padian submitted a substitute resolution (Handout A) for
consideration in place of the main motion, written after consultation with the
divisional leadership. He emphasized that faculty support a successful online
evaluation system. But faculty also feel strongly that the confidentiality and
validity of data used for academic personnel-related functions must be
considered separately from student-related uses, and the evaluation of teaching
effectiveness maintained under the purview of the Academic Senate and the vice
provost for academic affairs rather than the offices of student services or
facilities. The success of online evaluations at other institutions has been uneven.
These and other issues must be resolved before an online evaluation system is
mandated for this campus. Professor Padian acknowledged the contributions of
administrative staff in developing a system.
Motion:
Move that this substitute resolution on the online evaluation of courses be
considered in place of the main motion.
Preamble
1.
The campus needs a system to evaluate instructors that provides useful
data for personnel cases and that has an acceptable response rate and
profile from students.
2.
Currently available online evaluation systems offer several advantages, but
they also face documented problems that include low response rates,
bimodal responses, and skewed response demographics. These are
substantial enough that an online evaluation system should not be
mandated for campus departments at this time.
3.
Instructor evaluations are confidential, like student evaluations and staff
evaluations. Their purpose is to help evaluate instructors for promotion,
tenure, and merit increase. They can also be used by departments to
evaluate curricula. They are not intended or acceptable to be disseminated
to help students choose courses. The campus needs to separate these
functions, and to ensure the best evaluation of our faculty for purposes of
academic promotion.
4.
The University needs a system that does not put it at legal risk by
sponsoring the release of all confidential student ratings and comments on
instructors to the public, or to other students. The potential misuse of such
data, if released publicly, could be detrimental to the fairness of academic
promotion cases.
5.
Evaluation of instructors and courses is the purview of the faculty:
evaluations of instructors originate in departments, and personnel reviews
move through the academic hierarchy to the Academic Senate (Budget
Draft Minutes
Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate
April 22, 2010, 3:00 to 4:30 p.m.
Booth Auditorium, School of Law
Page 7 of 7
Committee) before proceeding to the executive administration. The campus
needs a system of policies regarding these evaluations, including metrics,
methods, and analyses, that must meet the goals of the faculty. Ultimate
responsibility for these decisions should reside with the Vice Provost for
Academic Affairs and Faculty Welfare, in consultation with the faculty.
Resolution
The campus administration is urged not to release or sponsor the release of
confidential student reviews of instructors that are intended for use in the
evaluation of academic promotion cases. The administration is further urged not
to mandate online instructor evaluation until and unless its problems are
resolved to the satisfaction of the Academic Senate.
The faculty urges that the office of the VPAA work with the Academic Senate to
develop methods, metrics, and oversight and accountability necessary to ensure the
best possible improvements in evaluating instructors. They will report on their
progress at the Fall Division meeting.
The motion was seconded.
Procedural Motion:
Move that the meeting be extended to 5:15 p.m.
The motion was seconded.
Amendment to the Procedural Motion:
Move that the meeting be extended to 5:29
The motion was seconded.
Vote: The procedural motion, as amended to extend the meeting to 5:29
p.m., carried by a majority vote.
Discussion:
Audience members were given two minutes each to comment. Faculty expressed
support for a successful online evaluation system, but several were opposed to
the public release of faculty evaluation data and urged further consideration of
that issue. Failed online efforts at other institutions were noted. Chief Campus
Counsel Christopher Patti responded to a question about the confidentiality of
evaluation data.
Vote: The substitute resolution carried by a majority vote of 41 in favor,
and 5 opposed.
ACTION: The substitute resolution on online evaluation of courses was approved.
The meeting was adjourned at 5:25 p.m.
Gary Holland
Secretary, Berkeley Division
Handout A:
[Substitute] resolution submitted to the Berkeley Academic Senate regarding
proposed online evaluation of courses campuswide.