ACADEMIC SENATE
of
THE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY
401 Golden Shore, Room 139
Long Beach, California 90802-4210
562-951-4010
MINUTES
Meeting of November 1-2, 2001
CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 10:05 a.m. on Thursday,
November 1, 2001, by Chair Jacquelyn Kegley.
ROLL CALL: Senators and alternates (*) attending the meeting were: (Bakersfield)
Jacquelyn Kegley, John Tarjan; (Channel Islands) Lillian Vega-Castaneda, Observer,
(Chico) Kathleen Kaiser, Samuel Edelman; (Dominguez Hills) Hal Charnofsky, Dick
Williams; (Fresno) Bill Fasse*, Lester Pincu; (Fullerton) Vincent Buck, Bill Meyer, Barry
Pasternack; (Hayward) Calvin Caplan, Susan Sunderland; (Humboldt) Robert Snyder,
Marshelle Thobaben; (Long Beach) Gene Dinielli, David Hood, Susan Rice; (Los Angeles) J.
Theodore Anagnoson, Marshall Cates; (Maritime Academy) James Wheeler; (Monterey
Bay) J. Ken Nishita; (Northridge) Lynne Cook, Michael Reagan, Barbara Swerkes;
(Pomona) Rochelle Kellner, Marvin Klein; (Sacramento) Cristy Jensen, Thomas Krabacher,
Louise Timmer; (San Bernardino) Buckley Barrett; (San Diego) Ray Boddy, Brent Rushall,
Thomas Warschauer; (San Francisco) Eunice Aaron, Robert Cherny, Jan Gregory; (San
José) David McNeil, Bethany Shifflett; (San Luis Obispo) Reginald Gooden, Myron Hood;
(San Marcos) Dick Montanari, A. Sandy Parsons; (Sonoma) Philip McGough, Susan
McKillop; (Stanislaus) John Sarraille, Mark Thompson; (Chancellor's Office) David Spence.
INTRODUCTIONS
During the course of the meeting the Chair introduced:
Harold Goldwhite, Faculty Trustee and Professor of Chemistry, CSU Los Angeles
Gary Hammerstrom, Associate Vice Chancellor, Academic Affairs, CSU
Donald Moore, Emeritus and Retired Faculty Association (non-voting delegate)
Michael Lee, ACE Fellow, CSU Sacramento
Susan Meisenhelder, President, California Faculty Association
LaLisha Norton, California State Student Association Liaison to Academic Senate CSU
David Spence, Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Academic Officer, CSU
Richard West, Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Financial Officer, CSU
Deborah Hennessy, Executive Director, Academic Senate CSU
Margaret Price, Assistant to Executive Director, Academic Senate CSU
Shirley Sparkman, Staff Assistant–Budget, Academic Senate CSU
Tracy Butler, Administrative Assistant, Academic Senate CSU
ANNOUNCEMENTS AND REPORTS
REPORT OF CHAIR JACQUELYN ANN K. KEGLEY
November 2001
Intersegmental Coordinating Council Budget Meeting- September 17, 2001
The September meeting of the Intersegmental Coordinating Council was held by
conference call. Previous meetings had focused on a series of budget proposals including
funds for the Diagnostic Writing and Diagnostic Math Services, Articulation System
Stimulating Inter-institutional Student Transfer (ASSIST), the Academic Improvement and
Achievements project, Student Friendly Services, and an ICAS project for competency
statement in the Sciences and the Social Sciences. However, due to serious fiscal downturn
the California Round Table made the decision to support only a proposal for Student
Friendly Services funded by the California Department of Education. All three segments,
University of California (UC), California State University (CSU) and California
Community Colleges (CCC) decided not to place intersegmental projects into their
budgets this year, but indicated support for these projects should the budgetary picture
become more optimistic. (Each of the segments usually carries one or more of the projects
in their budgets, e.g., CSU carries the budget for the diagnostic services and UC for
ASSIST.) I registered deep concern that this type of decision had been made. Although I
understood caution on budgets and a desire to maintain our own needs, I believe that not
supporting the intersegmental projects, even if one is aware that funding will not occur,
sends the wrong signal to the legislature and the governor. It seems to me that
coordination and cooperation among segments is a theme for legislators and certainly for
the Master Plan groups. It remains to be seen what the impact of this decision will be. It
needs to be noted that this does not mean that these projects will not continue, e.g., ASSIST
and the Diagnostic services, but that needed expansions will not occur. Again, I am
concerned about the message being sent to the legislature and governor about the
importance of intersegmental projects.
Shared Governance Panel- September 20, 2001––CSU Chico
I took part in a very fine panel on shared governance as part of the “Excellence in Learning
and Teaching” Conference at CSU Chico on September 20, 2001. Panelists included Scott
McNall, Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs; myself, Trustee Debra Farar;
Vice Chancellor and Chief Academic Officer David Spence; Amber Johnson, President of
the Associated Students at Chico, and Paul Person, Chair of the Chico Academic Senate.
Each of us shared different aspects of shared governance including suggestions about
making it a more vital part of university and faculty life. The panel was taped and we
plan to make copies available to those who might wish copies. My remarks are available
and posted on the Academic Senate CSU web site. I also attended some of the university
sessions and enjoyed my visit to this campus.
Meeting of ICAS, September 27, 2001
The first full session of the Intersegmental Council of Academic Senates was held in
Sacramento September 27. Each segment chair shared reports on issues of concern to their
senates. UC is particularly concerned about the difficulty they are having in attracting
quality graduate students in all fields. CSU will share information on the Forgivable Loan
Program and we urged that CSU work with our Task Force on Post-Baccalaureate and
2
Graduate studies. Hoke Simpson, the CCC Senate President, shared their concern about a
pending Supreme Court decision that impacts present affirmative action programs. CSU
will also face some changes in this area and this issue will be discussed in the future. The
Blue Ribbon Panel for Transfer was discussed and a meeting with Gary Hart and the
segment senate chairs was scheduled for that day. UC has postponed their Dual
Admissions program. There was brief discussion of the CSU proposal for Dual
Admissions. It was decided to create a work group on English as a Second Language
(ESL) issues. Representatives will be appointed from each segment.
Intersegmental Coordinating Council Retreat––Sacramento: October 11-12
The Intersegmental Coordinating Council held their annual retreat in Sacramento on
October 11-12. During this time we reviewed the many ICC-sponsored activities that take
place within the framework of the various initiatives proposed by the California Round
Table. A number of our CSU faculty members have been much involved with Initiative 1
which is to promote the alignment of the newly adopted State Board of Education
standards with expectations of students for admission to higher education and with
appropriate assessment instruments. A conference is also planned for the ICC community
and other invitees on the Standards and Assessment and a “landscape document” on the
standards is being prepared for distribution. These projects are geared to help encourage
understanding and discussion among teachers at all levels of education about
expectations. Faculty members from all the segments have been working hard to achieve
Initiative 3, which is to strengthen the transfer process. A new initiative scheduled for
next year is to develop an intersegmental transfer outreach program including an
intersegmental transfer brochure as well as other forms of communication and monitoring.
There will also be a new focus in all areas of interest on the middle school. General
principles for future activities include an emphasis on regional efforts, a student-centered
focus, a programmatic approach and efforts directed to clear outcomes.
The First International Conference on Service Learning Research––Berkeley
Over three hundred faculty persons from all over the United States and from the United
Kingdom and Australia joined this first international conference on service learning
research. This is a great step forward in not only advancing the case for service learning
but also for making it part of mainstream faculty research activity. A number of excellent
papers were presented on all phases of the issues including outcomes for student learning
and for community enhancement. CSU was well represented in this effort and I am proud
of the work our faculty are doing in this area.
The Intersegmental Council of Academic Senates––October 22––Oakland
Discussion at the October 22 ICAS meeting began with each segment Chair expressing
concerns about budget problems and the financial situation of California. It was agreed
that at the November meeting this issue would be discussed more thoroughly including
suggestions for dealing with a possible 15% reduction. In reporting on our Task Force
activity, I urged that we all get together as faculty on both intellectual property and
graduate education. The UC and CCC faculty agreed to this strategy. California
Articulation Number system (CAN) now seems revitalized and soon three of our core
projects will have CAN courses as will some of the impact projects, e.g., chemistry,
physics, biology, math, agriculture and food and nutrition. Work on the revised English
3
competency statement is moving to completion. It was agreed to identify a committee to
begin work on the revised science competency statement. Priorities were established for
Intersegmental Joint Faculty Projects funded through the CCC. Four were specified.
These were: updating the science competency statements; improving intersegmental
access to library resources for students and faculty; identifying occupational education
courses for development to baccalaureate level preparation including developing content
standards and sequencing; and evaluating and strengthening articulation and transfer
mechanisms including access to counseling. Finally, copies of our 21st Century document
were given to the group and Bob Cherny presented his power point presentation. The
response was very positive including generally the comment “you have done what all
three segments should have done.”
Master Plan Hearings and Work Group Reports––Fairmont Hotel, San Francisco––
October 22-23
The Academic Senate CSU was well represented at this important meeting. I was able to
attend all the sessions. On Monday Susan McKillop, Louise Timmer, Eunice Aaron, Sandy
Parsons and David McNeil joined me. David McNeil returned on Tuesday along with
Cristy Jensen, and Robert Cherny.
*****
Standing Committee Reports:
Academic Affairs Committee On behalf of the AAC, Chair Snyder reported that the
Academic Affairs Committee continued its discussion of remediation issues. We are
looking at ways to assess the first-year remediation policy other than graduation rates.
The Committee will send a letter to the Executive Committee suggesting a broader set of
measures for the Chancellor's Office to track. Vice Chancellor Spence joined Academic
Affairs, together with the Executive Committee and members of TEKR, to discuss the
agreement with the UC system on offering joint Ed.Ds. A number of suggestions were
made on how to improve the agreement. While very limited consultation occurred on this
agreement, Vice Chancellor Spence assured the Committee that appropriate consultation
would take place on the implementation of the agreement. The Committee will update
E.O. 365, which covers credit by examination. We will also begin drafting a systemwide
policy on the "2+2" programs in which college credit is given for high school courses.
Faculty Trustee Harold Goldwhite:
Preview of the Meeting of the Board of Trustees, November 13-14, 2001
The Board of Trustees will meet on November 13 and 14 at the Chancellor's Office.
As usual the full text of the Board agenda is available at the following website:
http://www.calstate.edu/co/bot/Agendas/(http://www.calstate.edu/co/bot/Agendas/)
Much of this meeting's agenda is carried over from the September meeting's proposed
agenda. As you will all recall, that meeting was postponed and finally held by conference
call. I was out of the country for the October conference call meeting of the Board, and did
not participate. The only agenda item was approval of the Trustees' budget for 2002-2003.
The Board requested the full partnership budget which would increase general fund
support for the CSU by over 9%. Included would be a 4% enrollment increase and a 4%
4
increase in compensation for all CSU employees. The Governor's budget proposal will be
released in early December 2001.
In closed session the Committee on Educational Policy will review proposals for honorary
degrees. The Board will discuss personnel matters including executive review also in
closed session. The Committee of the Whole will hear the semi-annual litigation report
and a final report on the earthquake recovery program at CSU Northridge.
The Committee on Finance will hear budget updates; requests for financing for auxiliaries
at Sacramento, San Francisco, Fullerton, and San Marcos; the annual investment report;
and proposals for improving the Trustees' Revenue Bond Program. The annual student
fee report makes interesting reading. The average systemwide and campus fees total
$1876; the average increase from last year is $37. The cost of education in the CSU, defined
as the ratio between the sum of general fund appropriations plus state university fees and
the number of FTES, is $10,191. Thus the average student pays 18.4% of the "cost of
education" via state university fees. The agenda lists 16 institutions across the country that
are similar in type to the CSU. Average fees at these is $4168 for 2001-2002. The CSU's fees
are the lowest listed.
The Committee on Campus Planning, Buildings, and Grounds will be asked to approve
the plans for student housing at San Marcos; accept a gift of the UNOCAL pier at Avila
Beach, to CSPU San Luis Obispo, to be used in marine science programs; and approve
schematic plans for a parking structure at Northridge.
The Committee on University and Faculty Personnel will be asked to approve a 2%
increase across the board in compensation for executives in 2001-2002.
In addition to a general review of advancement plans for this academic year, the
Committee on Institutional Advancement will be asked to approve the naming of facilities
at San Bernardino and Bakersfield.
The Committee on Educational Policy will be asked to approve fast-track program
developments at Fresno, Long Beach, and Stanislaus; and will hear the first systemwide
evaluation of teacher preparation programs in the CSU. Academic Senate leaders will
then present to the Board the Senate report on "The CSU at the Beginning of the 21st
Century: Meeting the Needs of the People of California."
5
ACTION
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: The agenda, having been moved and seconded, was
approved.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes, having been moved and seconded, were
approved.
The motion to reorder the agenda by moving Item 2, AS-2550-01/FA, to the first action
item was approved.
Items 4 and 6, placeholders, were deleted.
AS-2550-01/FA
EVALUATING TEACHING PERFORMANCE OF
TEMPORARY FACULTY
RESOLVED:
That the Academic Senate of the California State University encourage all
campuses to develop policies and procedures for the periodic evaluation of
temporary faculty (lecturers) consistent with Articles 15.1 and 15.2 of the
CBA, as appropriate, and consistent with “'best practice” in the evaluation
of faculty in higher education; and be it further
RESOLVED:
That the Academic Senate CSU commend campus Senates that have
already developed such language and models for equitable evaluation of
lecturer faculty.
RATIONALE: Evaluation of tenure-track/tenured faculty in CSU
normally follows a prescribed course clearly embedded in campus policies.
At present, not all campuses in the CSU have analogous and explicit
mechanisms for peer or chair review of teaching and/or other aspects of
lecturers’ performance. In some instances, evaluation of lecturers’ teaching
performance is haphazard and often inconsistent. Increased workload of
tenured/tenure-track faculty is often cited as one reason for the erratic
procedures used in evaluating the teaching performance of lecturer faculty.
However, the language of Article 15.2 in the Collective Bargaining
Agreement permits a variety of options: observation and evaluation of
classroom teaching by lecturer colleagues from the same department as
well as tenured/tenure-track faculty; by department chairs; by faculty from
allied disciplines if they are qualified to assess substantive knowledge in
the field of the person they are observing, as well as teaching skills.
To the extent that campuses can devise a variety of models as variations on
the traditional pattern of peer evaluation, they may enrich the quality of
their programs. In fact, there is an advantage to faculty, students, and
academic programs if a high standard of faculty evaluation is maintained
throughout the CSU, one rooted in collegial principles such as advance
notification about observations; formative as well as summative evaluation;
6
opportunities to improve performance; clear indications about concerns the
department may have about an individual's teaching performance
(summative feedback); an opportunity to rectify them if possible; written
commentary on observations; opportunities for rebuttal.
AS-2550-01/FA motion will be a second reading item at the January 24-25, 2002, meeting.
The motion to place the original Item 1, AS-2546-01/EX and AS-2546-01/Cherny
Amendment, as a time certain Friday at 9:30 a.m. was approved
AS-2551-01/FA
FACULTY OFFICE SPACE IN THE CSU
RESOLVED:
That the Academic Senate of the California State University urge the
Chancellor to work closely with campus presidents to seek solutions to the
problem of overcrowded faculty offices; and be it further
RESOLVED:
That the Academic Senate CSU urge the Chancellor and campus
presidents, when determining and allocating faculty office space needs, to
take into consideration factors such as the function for which any faculty
office space will be used, new technologies, specialized equipment needs,
and discipline specific pedagogues; and be it further
RESOLVED:
That the Academic Senate CSU urge the Chancellor to accelerate efforts to
implement the new, more flexible system policy on “assignable square
footage,” and to ensure that the new policy will provide the ability to
expand the amount of space allocated for each faculty office; and be it
further
RESOLVED:
That the Academic Senate CSU urge campus presidents, in consultation
with faculty, to take advantage of the system’s interest in providing
campuses with greater flexibility in the assignment of new or remodeled
space; and be it further
RESOLVED:
That the Academic Senate CSU urge the Chancellor, campus senates, and
campus presidents to keep high on their list of budget and space priorities
the development of sufficient faculty office space.
RATIONALE: Faculty productivity and the quality of student-faculty
interactions suffer when inadequate and/or inappropriate office space is
provided for faculty. In addition, our ability to attract and retain faculty is
impaired when inadequate and/or inappropriate office space is provided
for faculty. As the 21st century report draws out, “measures of the quality
of teaching and the effectiveness of learning emphasize contact between
teachers and learners.” Some of the most valuable teaching and learning
opportunities occur outside the classroom when students seek clarification
of issues, academic advising, discussion of research endeavors, career
advice, etc. Without appropriate office space these interactions are
7
diminished or non-existent. The 21st century report also highlights that
“Chancellor Reynolds made a commitment to end multiple person faculty
offices. Nearly two decades later, many full-time CSU faculty still share
offices, and failure to build more faculty offices has produced serious
crowding”. The formula (110/FTEF) for faculty office space is dated (1966)
and in need not only of an increase, but of revision in the context of our
unprecedented growth as a system. With the CSU moving in the direction
of year round operation the problem will only be exacerbated. The time to
address the need for more faculty office space is past due and the concerted
effort of all will be needed to meet the challenge.
AS-2551-01/FA motion will be a second reading item at the January 24-25, 2002, meeting.
AS-2552-01/TEKR
SUPPORT FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF SB 2042 (ALPERT):
MULTIPLE SUBJECT TEACHING CREDENTIAL
RESOLVED:
The Academic Senate of the California State University urge the faculty
involved in teacher preparation, both subject matter and education, to
collaborate in curriculum refinement to ensure that prospective multiple
subject teachers are prepared to teach the subject matter designated in the
K-8 Academic Content Standards; and be it further
RESOLVED:
That the Academic Senate CSU urge the campus faculty to assume
leadership in modifying curriculum where appropriate to conform to the
newly adopted California Commission on Teacher Credentialing standards
as set forth in the Standards of Program Quality and Effectiveness for the Subject
Matter Requirement for the Multiple Subject Teaching Credential, developed
pursuant to SB 2042; and be it further
RESOLVED:
That the Academic Senate CSU urge campus faculty to participate in the
systemwide meetings to address these curricular matters in Los Angeles on
December 6 and December 7, 2001.
RATIONALE: The Governor’s Office, the Legislature, the State Board of
Education, and the general public expect that prospective teachers be adequately
prepared in relation to the K-12 Academic Content Standards (ACS) that make up
the core curriculum in California’s public schools. In response to SB 2042, the
California Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CCTC) has now addressed these
concerns with new accreditation standards that will go into effect during the next
two years. With the exception of some courses in teaching methods, the majority of
the content on which new teachers rely is taught through subject matter areas in
arts, humanities, and sciences.
Faculty have primary responsibility for the curriculum and are fundamental to its
implementation. The commitment of faculty to the effective subject matter and
pedagogical preparation of teachers will be evidenced in the faculty leadership in
examining and refining as needed teacher preparation curriculum.
8
The leadership of the Statewide Academic Senate is organizing an information and
initial planning meeting for campus teams of arts, humanities, and sciences
faculty and administrators to learn about the new state standards regarding
subject matter preparation for students pursuing multiple subject teaching
credentials. The meeting will feature national and state educational leaders and
will include briefings and technical assistance from CCTC staff. It will be held
Thursday, December 6, and Friday, December 7, at the Crowne Plaza Hotel near
Los Angeles International Airport (LAX)
AS-2552-01/TEKR motion approved unanimously.
AS-2553-01/Gooden/Hood resolution of commendation for Timothy Kersten upon his
retirement was introduced and approved by acclamation.
AS-2546-01/EX CONSTITUTIONAL REVISION
RESOLVED:
That the Academic Senate of the California State University transfer Article
II Section 1 of the Constitution of the Academic Senate of the California
State University to Article II of the Bylaws; and be it further
RESOLVED:
That Article II Section 1 of the Constitution now read:
Membership: The membership of the Academic Senate shall be decided by
the Academic Senate under provisions in the Bylaws of the Academic
Senate.
RATIONALE: As the number and sizes of the campuses of the California
State University change over time, the Academic Senate CSU may find it
necessary to reconsider membership. Because the process to amend the
Senate’s Constitution is so complex and time-consuming, this resolution
transfers this authority to the Bylaws, enabling the campus senates and the
Academic Senate CSU to be free to make recommendations more generally
on representation.
AS-2546-01/EX motion postponed to January plenary.
AS-2546-01/ Cherny Amendment
RESOLVED:
AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION
That the Academic Senate of the California State University (CSU)
recommend to the faculty of the CSU the following constitutional
amendment regarding Senate membership.
Article II
Section 1. Membership
1. The Academic Senate shall consist of elected campus representatives
apportioned as follows:
9
a minimum of two senators from each campus plus one additional
senator from each of the seven campuses which have the highest FTEF.
2. a) the Academic Senate shall also include the immediate past chair of the
Academic Senate if not an elected member (who shall not be counted as
a campus representative if not an elected member);
b) the Chancellor or representative as an ex-officio non-voting member.
3. Any addition to the number to be elected from a campus shall take effect
during elections for the following academic year and any reduction in
number shall take effect at the first expiration of a term of an incumbent
senator from that campus.
RATIONALE: The change will permit the Senate to expand its membership in
total, and thus permit more campuses to have more than the minimum of two
senators. It also provides for an annual consideration of apportionment in
January, once the fall FTEF is known and once the budget for the coming year is at
least in its initial form. Finally, it would permit the largest campuses to have more
than three senators if that seems both appropriate and financially feasible to the
Senate. Prior to the mid-1990s, there was no maximum size to the Senate and the
largest campuses did have four senators. This was changed in the mid-1990s in
response to financial exigencies.
If approved by the Senate, this amendment will go to campuses for approval in
keeping with the process for amendment outlined in Article VII. It is anticipated
that, if ratified, this amendment will take effect with the 2002-03 academic year.
The amendment was moved, seconded and perfected as substitute to AS-2546-01/EX.
The Chair declared the meeting adjourned at 1:00 p.m. on Friday, November 2, 2001.
*****
Approved (or corrected)
Date:________________________
_______________________________
Jacquelyn Ann K. Kegley, Chair
_______________________________
Les Pincu, Secretary
________________________________
Margaret Price, Recording Secretary
10