CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE___________________________________________
MINUTES OF MEETING 05/10/11________ APPROVED BY COMMITTEE________________
Sub. To Exec. Comm. ___________________________ Approved by Exec. Comm.______________
Sub. To Acad. Senate ____________________________ Approved by Acad. Senate ______________
POLICY ITEMS _____________________________________________________________________
Members Present: Ric Alviso, Michael Barrett (Chair), Sandra Chong, Doris Helfer, Robert Kladifko,
Amalie Orme, Jerry Schutte, Diane Stephens, Veda Ward.
Member Absent: Barry Cleveland, Paul Lazarony
1. Call to Order
The Chair called the meeting to order at 2:05 p.m.
2. Approval of the Agenda
Barrett added an item to the agenda (10A), consideration of the information Schutte
presented on satisfaction by examination. The agenda was approved, as amended.
3. Approval of Minutes from April 12, 2011 Meeting
The minutes of the April 12, 2011 meeting were approved with corrections to numbers 4
and 6.
4. Chair’s Report
Barrett welcomed Carol Shubin and recognized Schutte and Ward re-elected. Barrett
thanked everyone for their participation on the committee for the past year.
The Senate has not met since the last ERC meeting. Barrett attended the Academic Affairs
Budget Working Session on May 3rd, 2011. There were foundational items introduced by
the Provost for consideration for next year’s budget and shortfalls. The first item for
planning purposes is that student faculty ratios would be increased by no more than5%.
The second item is that even if there are cuts, there will be an emphasis on finding
improvements within those cuts. The third item is that an analysis of the myriad centers we
have on campus may be undertaken. The fourth item is that the Provost is willing to
investigate the long range savings that might be utilized through changes in technology.
The last item is that the Provost is encouraging colleges to look at savings by looking at
small programs and small departments, with possible consolidations focused on cost
effectiveness.
5. Executive Secretary’s Report
Stephens reported on the Budget Working Session, May 3rd, 2011 - Summary of Meeting
Outcomes and the remarks by Provost Hellenbrand.
I.
Caretaking of the University
a. Need an all-funds budget plan for the university
b. The State budget is thoroughly predictable—budgets are decreasing and we must
increase revenue generation
II.
Think of Faculty Hiring in a World with Serial One-Time Funding
III.
Actions for Us to Consider
a. Think about areas where we can sensibly increase SFR
b. Look at DUF rate in classes
c. Identify courses that overlap between departments and share facilities –especially
focusing on those with recent decreases in FTES
d. Take a hard look at efficiencies and uses of resources: cohorts, minors, options, lowenrolled sections, course substitutions
e. Inclination is that collapsing divisions and departments throughout the division isn’t
feasible. (If individuals have ideas about reorganization in the units, they can
contact Provost directly.) But, central Academic Affairs will consider reorganization
of its own operations.
f. Consider savings in technology, supplies, and services. Consider bulk purchases.
MARs, et al., to work on technology spending plan.
g. Look at expanding cycles of replacement for equipment and services.
h. Determine possible savings from changes in technology structure. Commission a
group to look at centralized web development. Virtualize servers. Lab usage should
be uniform and economical. Then, work with IT.
IV.
Revenue Generation
a. Increase international students and anticipate where they will land.
b. Take a hard look at Grants and Contracts. While our indirect cost recovery is low,
they can increase by $1MM.
c. Push the limit on the 125% rule in order to bring in funding from contracts and
technology transfer (e.g., SDSU model).
d. Look at services in the centers (especially HHD and ED) for which we can charge.
(Otherwise, we’re just giving away state funds.)
e. Tame centers that are costing us money.
f. Increase work with Tseng College of Extended Learning. Examples:
i. Work with high schools to offer college-ready courses and provide pre-college
degree credit. This is beyond AP—in the 4-12 unit range. This is a burgeoning
market as we consider Joyce Feucht-Haviar’s “stackable curriculum” model.
ii. There are 22 million people in higher education. 140 million people will do some
kind of lifelong learning. We should turn our attention to build programs that
bridge from the BA to lifelong learning.
We will schedule meetings with the colleges (deans, associate deans, MARs) in May
and June. Colleges should be prepared to answer which of the above are do-able in
the short and long term. Revenues generated may be able to be applied to faculty
positions in the future if funds are not needed to bridge other gaps. Bring ideas for
increasing revenue.
Stephens also report on an item unrelated to the Budget working session. A few weeks ago,
there was an incident on a field trip where a student was badly injured and there was no
cellular coverage. Stephens notified the committee members that Academic Resources and
Planning has a satellite phone available to be checked out specifically for this purpose. If
anyone is going out to a remote location without cellular coverage, please make
arrangements in advance. There is no cost to check out the phone, but actual usage would
incur some costs.
6. CSU Academic Senate Report
Chong attended the committee meeting online from CSUN. She stated that there are
currently two candidates under consideration by the governor and we should have a faculty
trustee announced and appointed by the end of this month. Since there will be two trustees,
there will always be an overlap of trustees. As for Early Start, there has been very little
development at the statewide level because a lot of the work has been given to the
individual campuses to implement.
A resolution was passed with a commendation to the Office of the Chancellor
acknowledging the work they have done in responding to the career technology education..
Another resolution that passed was to make the donor information transparent. There was
also a resolution passed to support the tuition fees at the level of regular doctoral programs
rather than the CSU cost for the doctoral program.
There has been a huge difference between campuses in the minimum grade required for the
Golden Four, which consists of Oral Language Communication, Written Language
Communication, Critical Thinking Skills, and Math. Some campuses require a C or better in
each class, or C average, or you can have a D in a class and still have a C average. They are
trying to find a way to make it consistent.
Ben Quillian, Executive Vice Chancellor, relayed that the governor identified an overall
budget shortfall of $26.4 billion, and the CSU is facing an additional $13 billion shortfall
without a tax restoration in May. Without looking at furloughs, we are first looking at
increasing tuition and cutting enrollment as the way to deal with the first $500 million cuts.
Planned cuts to the campuses are at $281 million and $11 million of that is at the
Chancellor’s Office level. We are not sure how to take additional cuts if there is an
additional $500 million, but everything will have to be on the table if that does happen.
Quillian is opposed to reducing compensation because it is a savings in the short run but not
the long run.
7. IT Classroom Technology Student Survey Results
Time Certain: 2:30 p.m. (Dominic Little; Renate Wigfall; Jeff Wiegley)
Little gave a presentation on the preliminary findings of “Classroom Technology
Committee’s Questions from the Annual IT Student Survey.” The overall objective was to
understand the current relationship CSUN students have with educational technology and
to determine how educational technology is affecting their learning environment. This
survey was made available to approximately 10,000 students at random, and a total of
2,260 students responded to the survey.
Following are the characteristics of survey respondents:
30% of students were Juniors
A little over 80% of respondents were full-time students
20% of students were from the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences, and a little
over 15% were from the College of Business and Economics
60% of students said they are not transfer students
Over 60% of students were female
40% of students were between the age of 20-22
Here are the highlights of the survey:
Over 80% have a personal computer for their exclusive use
Close to 80% most frequently use a laptop computer
Close to 60% own a smartphone
Close to 80% would use their smartphone to access CSUN transactions and
information, and about 70% would use their smartphones to communicate with
instructors and also to use Moodle
Close to 90% do not own an e-Reader, and of the 12% that do, they were mainly
graduate students and 40% of these students use an e-Reader to complete academic
coursework
A little over 25% use the university-provided computer labs because they provide a
working environment for them to focus, and over 20% use the computer labs
because they have the software they need.
Over 40% strongly agree they would use their own computer instead of campus
computers if the software was available both on and off campus
Over 50% strongly agree that purchasing their own software for their own
computer is too expensive
Over 60% said being able to print documents on campus is very important
Close to 50% are willing to pay a fee for using on-campus printers under some
circumstances, and about 45% of students said they will not pay for printing
Over 50% want more wireless network availability, and about 45% want more
power outlets
A little over 80% would choose software that they can use on their own computers
instead of technology support and training
About 60% would choose quiet study spaces over computer labs
There was a close tie between study spaces set up for laptop use--about 48%, and
prints in the lab--about 52%.
8. Survey results to students about increase in tuition (Schutte)
In the last semester, there was a survey done on campus about tuition increases and what
would cause students to drop out. Schutte stated that this is something for everyone on the
committee to think about over the summer because if the ERC committee does not have a
voice, then the students will not have a voice. This survey is not gender related, not
financial aid related, and only potentially related to income.
One of the questions on the survey was “How much of a tuition increase will cause you to
drop out of school? Survey results show that approximately 20% of students will drop out
even with a 10% increase in tuition.
9. Valley Performing Arts Center (VPAC) Budget
Time Certain: 3:00 p.m. (Provost Harry Hellenbrand; Dean Robert Bucker; Laila
Asgari; Colin Donahue)
Dean Bucker presented the 2010/11 VPAC budget and stated that the main income for the
Valley Performing Arts Center is from base budget allocations, one-time adjustments,
presenting, licensing, concessions, and facilities fees. That sums up to about $2,249,281 for
General Funds, $1,072,074 for State Trust, and $172,000 for Arts Education Grant Funding.
The expenses for VPAC consist of management/staff salaries, student workers/pooled
positions, faculty graphics, administrative supplies and services, artist’s fees, green room,
artist related fees, beta test costs, concessions, marketing, printing,
programming/production expenses, overhead fees, and security services.
In the category of student workers, over half of that amount is student workers in the area
of ushering and front of house activities. In the ticket office, there is only one staff and the
rest are student workers. Faculty graphics, is the use of faculty expertise from the Art
department. The Green Room is for taking care of Artists when they are here in terms of
catering and hospitality. Regarding Artist fees/cost, this fee is to buy out certain expenses
that Artists have in their contract. Beta Test Costs are related to the front of house and back
of house expenses for the two beta tests in the fall, which was made available free.
Donahue stated from a facilities standpoint, they really have to look at it from two
perspectives—the PPM standpoint and the custodial standpoint. They have been working
really closely with the Mike Curb College of Arts, Media, and Communications and have
focused all their planning around the normal event season and use primarily overtime on
the staff they have for event nights. For every event so far, they have been staffed with a
mechanic, a refrigeration mechanic, and an electrician on site just because of the nature of
the facility. There is a lot of ground, concrete, and landscape to take care of but everything
has been going very well.
10. 125% Rule
Time Certain: 3:30 p.m. (Melanie Williams)
Williams stated that from a chair’s perspective, the 125% rule presents a problem because
it limits our choices. Extended learning increasingly requests faculty to work on special
projects and classes that have unusual schedules and it takes a lot to schedule around it.
10A. Consideration of Satisfaction by Examination Motion
The following motion was presented to the Committee for consideration:
“Be it moved that the Educational Resources Committee of the Faculty Senate, after
deliberation and due diligence concerning the prospect of course work being fulfilled
through “satisfaction by examination” (SBE), as outlined in the working paper dated March
2010, attached hereto and incorporated by reference, and as vetted by Academic Affairs and
Associated Students, during the 2010-11 academic year, do hereby recommend to the
Faculty Senate Executive Committee that it review and approve a beta test of the concept,
during the academic year 2011-12, and that data be collected during that period, for review
by all relevant committees of Faculty Governance and Academic Affairs, to evaluate
potential full implementation of the procedure in the 2012-13 academic year.”
Respectively submitted
Jerald G. Schutte, ERC
The motion was passed unanimously and will be forwarded to the Faculty Senate Executive
Committee.
11. Election of New Chair
Jerald Schutte from Sociology was elected Chair of the Educational Resources Committee for
2011/12.
12. Announcements
The next ERC meeting will be held on September 13, 2011 in UN 211.