ACADEMIC SENATE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY
Plenary Report
January 17-18, 2008
Submitted by Bernadette Cheyne and Marshelle Thobaben
1. Approval of Minutes: The minutes of the November 8-9, 2007 Plenary were approved without dissent.
2. Reports/Presentations
2.1 Barry Pasternak, Statewide Senate Chair:
Chair Pasternak provided a detailed written report for the ASCSU January 2008 Plenary which
covered a variety of activities that he and other members of the Executive Committee had engaged in
during the past two months. Highlights included:






Attended the November Board of Trustees meeting and informed them of ASCSU’s resolution
opposing Proposition 92 and spoke about our resolution on Textbook Affordability. The
majority of discussion regarding the 2008/09 budget revolved around the proposed 10% student
fee increase. The BOT deferred action until March but indicated that if funding from the state is
not forthcoming the fee increase most likely would be imposed.
Attended an Access to Excellence Steering Committee meeting that was held at the
Chancellor’s Office where input on the Access to Excellence initiative from the ASCSU, campus
Senates and individual faculty was shared with the Committee.
Attended the Statewide Advisory Board P-12/Community College Leadership
Educational Doctorate at the Chancellor’s Office. All seven first wave campuses for the EdD
were approved by WASC without major problems. In total, there are 142 students in the
programs on the seven campuses.
Attended a meeting of the Intersegmental Committee of the Academic Senates (ICAS)
where issues of budget, legislative lobbying, textbook affordability, transfer and Proposition 92
were discussed.
Attended a meeting of the Provost’s Technology Steering Committee (PTSC). A committee
has been formed to work on developing a framework for assessing campus academic technology.
The goal is to develop a template that will give campuses some flexibility in terms of technology
funding. The Transforming Course Design initiative and online degree programs also were
discussed (see Gary Reichard’s report below).
At the Academic Council meeting there was discussion regarding the budget outlook and that
the CSU may not receive funding for student enrollment above the Compact. There was some
desire to work with the CFA and other unions in lobbying efforts to ensure adequate funding.
Chair Pasternak’s complete report contains considerably more detail on each of these topics and
others, and can be accessed at the following URL:
http://calstate.edu/AcadSen/Records/Chairs_Reports/documents/Jan08_Chairs_Report.pdf
2.2 Stephanie Brasley, Manager, Information Literacy Initiatives:

In the mid-nineties, the CSU recognized the need for students to have information competence
and became a trail-blazer in integrating this into the curriculum. This has now become a WASC
requirement.
2

Moved from the UC to the CSU system last February and has immersed herself in further
developing information competence initiatives.
2.3 Charles B. Reed, Chancellor:


Referenced the budget situation, expressing his belief that we are heading into a recession and
that this could be a long-term problem. On the positive side is that we have not been cut in the
current year. Noted that budget-wise we probably are third or fourth on the public’s priority list.
Reinforced two important numbers to be considered: a 10% cut for the CSU is $312 million and
a 10% fee increase is $73 million. We will be seeking to retain the $312 million and buy out the
fee increase. Noted that there still will be a shortfall because of increased costs for health care,
energy and salary increases, among others.
In terms of budget messages to the public, boiled it down to three essential messages: 1) 10%
cut will affect access right away by about 10,000 students; 2) it will affect California’s workforce;
and 3) it will affect the underserved populations of California. Suggested putting together a
campaign based upon “What kind of California do you want for yourself and your family?”
2.4 Gary Reichard, Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Academic Officer:






Given current budget realities, it is no longer realistic to think in terms of a $30 million
augmentation for institutional technology. However, that will remain a goal. Transforming
Course Design: Developmental Math will have 11 campuses participating and General
Chemistry will be the other. Faculty on participating campuses will be invited to be on the
design teams for these two courses and will have the charge of identifying topics and reviewing
what already exists. There also will be review teams who will serve as oversight for the design
teams. Are still very interested in enhancing the number of online degree programs offered by
the CSU at the baccalaureate level. Particularly are working with CSU East Bay which has
developed a relatively comprehensive plan relative to increasing its online offerings. Their plan
may serve as a model for other CSU campuses.
Have a proposed revised draft of the Access to Excellence Strategic Plan. There is significant
change in the formatting and, to a degree, in the content as related to balance between access and
excellence, among other matters. At the end of the month, the draft will be disseminated for
comment. The last stage will be a formal discussion regarding this draft. An important aspect of
the plan is to make apparent to the legislature and others the essential nature of the CSU. The
draft will then go to the BOT for final action in March.
Four campuses will be launching their EdD programs in the fall of 2008 and four more in fall of
2009. That will bring the total of EdD programs to 15.
Regarding the Voluntary System of Accountability, the Collegiate Learning Assessment has
been given on all CSU campuses. This appeared to be successful overall. Best practices are
being compiled and will be distributed to all campuses. Seniors will be tested in the spring.
Then the process will be repeated for both freshmen and seniors during the 2008-2009 academic
year.
Are forming a new council for faculty related to applied research: Ocean Affairs Science and
Technology (OAST). Its mission is to supply support for coastal and marine related activities.
The CSU has taken the lead in a letter of intent to the Lumina Foundation which would lead to
planning grants to help close learning and achievement gaps for students.
3
2.5 John Travis, CFA Senate Liaison:




In recent months the CFA has been preoccupied with a proposed California budget based
upon a $14 billion shortfall. Will be working with the CSU administration to convince the
legislature and public that proposed cuts will be catastrophic. Reaffirmed that budget crisis is
real and severe. Have already visited all the legislative offices with detailed information regarding
the consequences of budget cuts to the CSU.
If the $312 million cut to the CSU remains firm, then either party (CFA or CSU) can ask for reopening of negotiations regarding compensation. The CFA will discourage that, however, were
that to occur, the current contract allows for binding arbitration as well as concerted job actions.
CSU and CFA representatives have first year of the equity program resolved (primarily
affecting assistant professors) and they’ve begun to talk about the second year (associate and
professor ranks). Noted that the gathering of needed information was challenging, which
delayed resolution.
CFA has taken a position against Proposition 92 (community colleges), which is seen as a great
threat to other public institutions of higher education.
2.6 Craig Smith, Faculty Trustee:





Expressed his concern with the fiscal implications of Proposition 92 and urged that senators
help educate people on their campuses regarding this ballot measure.
Reinforced the importance of developing strategies to avoid reopening contract negotiations.
May look at financial aid set-asides that might not be needed for student aid.
Regarding faculty flow, 2006-07 was a very good recruitment year, with an approximately 75%
success rate in searches.
Has been giving special attention to department chair compensation, especially based upon
their increasing workloads.
Discussed changes in the Access to Excellence draft including: emphasis on uniqueness of
each campus and lack of overt inclusion of faculty workload issues.
2.7 Roberto Torres, CSSA Liaison:



This coming weekend the CSSA will be voting on a Textbook Accessibility resolution which
urges faculty to provide reading lists in a timely manner for disabled students.
Are still looking at parking issues, including student-only parking and parking affordability. In
the latter case, they are looking at alternative forms of funding.
They will be voting to get a proposition on the November ballot to provide tuition relief for
students. Regarding Proposition 92, they are going to vote on whether to take a stand. It
appears likely that they will take no stance.
3. Committee Recommendations
3.1 Drops, Withdrawals, Incompletes, and Repeats. Acknowledges the work of the CSU Taskforce on
Drops, Withdrawals, Incompletes, and Repeats and thanks the Taskforce members for their work.
Does not support the Taskforce recommendations which propose:
a.
Counting the withdrawal from a full semester of coursework as 6 of the 18 withdrawal units.
The ASCSU recommends that withdrawal from a full semester of coursework should not count
at all toward any limit on course withdrawals.
4
b. Counting withdrawals prior to transfer as part of the allowed 18 withdrawal units.
c. Counting repeats prior to transfer as part of the limit on repeated units.
Recommends that the CSU campuses work rapidly to implement electronic systems which give
students and advisors timely, ongoing advice on progress toward a degree or approaching curricular
deadlines or limits which might threaten efficient completion of curricular requirements.
Recommends that a reasonable phase-in period or delay be specified for these important policy
changes to take effect. SECOND READING. PASSED.
3.2 Support of International Experiences and Global Perspectives in CSU Educational
Programs. Affirms commitment to providing international perspectives to students through a
variety of activities. Endorses a strong focus on global understanding and cultural competencies.
Recognizes that international education and experiences increase students’ competitiveness in the
global marketplace. Urges the Chancellor and the Access to Excellence Steering Committee to
include appropriate language in the new strategic plan that promotes international perspectives
and/or experiences for all CSU students. Encourages CSU campuses to include, when appropriate,
language in their mission statements, learning objectives and campus strategic planning that promotes
international perspectives in CSU’s educational programs. Encourages CSU faculty to integrate
language learning and other components of international education in curricula, when appropriate.
Encourages faculty to review RTP policies to ensure that faculty’s international experience and
accomplishments are recognized and valued in the areas of research and scholarly activity, curricular
planning, service, and professional development. Encourages the Chancellor’s Office and campus
administrative leaders to allocate necessary resources for efforts such as curricular review and reform,
international exchange, global partnerships, and support systems for international students and
faculty. FIRST READING.
3.3 Distinctive Universities and Campuses: The Autonomy of Individual Institutions in a Multi
Institutional System. Reaffirms ASCSU recognition and acknowledgement of “Cornerstones,”
Principle 10, that the CSU comprises twenty-three separate institutions each with a distinct mission,
identity, and programs appropriate to its own unique environment. Continues, ever mindful of this
reality in its deliberations and actions, reserving to the universities and campus senates their role in
shared governance whenever possible. Urges the CSU BOT and the Chancellor to honor the
distinctiveness of our campuses and to support institutional autonomy to the fullest extent possible.
Urges the BOT to lead the American Council on Education (ACE) and the Association of
Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB) in endorsing the AAUP 1978 note to the
1966 joint policy “Statement on Government of Colleges and Universities.” Urges the BOT to
include explicit language in our new strategic plan “Access to Excellence” addressing institutional
autonomy that is at least as comprehensive and forceful as that in Principle 10 in the implementation
plan for our predecessor strategic plan “Cornerstones.” SECOND READING. PASSED.
3.4 Protecting Academic Freedom for California State University (CSU) Area Studies Programs.
Strongly supports the academic freedom of faculty in proposing, developing, and implementing
academic programs. Reaffirms that decisions affecting the curriculum and selection of faculty for
academic programs are under the purview of campus faculty, subject to the approval of academic
administrators when appropriate. Objects to and deplores recent actions and attempts by political
organizations and citizens’ groups to infringe upon academic freedom by bringing pressure to bear
on our universities and/or its programs, including Area Studies, to change academic offerings and/or
content. Encourages faculty and administration to support the integrity of all academic programs
and the academic freedom of faculty teaching in these programs, including Area Studies. SECOND
READING. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
5
3.6 Response to a Board of Trustees (BOT) September 2007 Agenda Item – CSU Remediation
Policies and Practices: Overview and Prospects. Recommends the Chancellor’s Office develop
and implement an ongoing process for updating and documenting remediation efforts at each of the
CSU campuses and the collaborative work being done between campus and local high schools, and
for assessing the results of these collaborative efforts and making adjustments and recommendations
for improvement as needed. Recommends that the Chancellor’s Office provide for a comprehensive
annual report in which findings and recommendations inform decisions about the levels of K-12 and
CSU funding necessary to adequately address the continuing needs for remediation. Recommends
that the Chancellor’s Office provide for a process for regularly bringing together developmental math
and English representatives – both faculty and staff – from the campuses to collaborate and to
provide the Chancellor’s Office and the Board of Trustees with an understanding of the strengths
and weaknesses of remediation efforts across the system. Concurs with the endorsement by the
Board of Trustees of a new set of guiding principles, but strongly recommends that these principles
be used as guidelines for remedial practices and not prescribe programs or practices. Approves of
the eight principles to be considered by the Board of Trustees with some clarifications. SECOND
READING. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
3.7 Business Professional Fees. Recommends that the BOT reject the proposal to implement a
$210/unit supplementary fee on students enrolled in graduate business programs as presented to the
BOT in September 2007. Endorses the following principles:
a.
The CSU must make every effort to meet its financial needs without increasing the costs for
students and potential students.
b. Proposals to determine student fees on the basis of the discipline program in which the students
are enrolled, or on the basis of the potential economic benefit accruing to students in a given
program, must be carefully considered for their impact on both affected students and on all
other programs in the CSU.
c. Proposals to determine student fees on the basis of discipline must take into account the
diversity of CSU’s constituent universities and the differing situations of degree programs.
Acknowledges the serious financial challenges faced by American Association of Collegiate Schools
of Business (AACSB)-accredited business degree programs in the CSU in meeting the requirements
for accreditation. Recognizes the market-based constraints faced by such programs seeking to hire
and retain high-quality faculty. Urges the Chancellor’s Office to work with the Executive Committee
of the ASCSU as well as faculty in Business and other disciplines to craft an approach to meeting
these challenges – and similar challenges facing the CSU in other disciplines. This approach should
not unduly burden students, and does not create unwarranted inequalities among programs, does not
move significantly in the direction of “privatizing” CSU programs, and is situated within the broader
context of a clearly defined policy governing differentiation of fees by discipline. SECOND
READING. PASSED.
3.8 Role and Responsibilities of the CSU Doctorate in Education Advisory Committee.
Commends the Chancellor’s Office for the quality of the consultation that occurred with the ASCSU
ExCom in the establishment of the charge and membership for the new CSU Doctorate in
Education Advisory Committee. Recommends that the proposed CSU Doctorate in Education
Advisory Committee assume the responsibility for implementing the recommendations intended to
promote and establish the CSU as a center of “High Quality Ed.D. Programs in Educational
Leadership” as specified in AS-2792-07. Recommends that the proposed CSU Doctorate in
Education Advisory Committee (AS-2793-07) assume the responsibility to ensure independence and
autonomy of each Ed.D. Doctorate program. SECOND READING. PASSED.
6
3.9 Commendation for Patrick Lenz. CSU Budget Analyst Patrick Lenz was commended by the
ASCSU for his years of service and offered best wishes in his new position with the UC. FIRST
READING WAIVED. PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
3.10 Change to Academic Senate Bylaws. Recommends a number of changes in the ASCSU Bylaws
as related to the names and duties of the standing committees in order to balance committee
workload and better reflect the topics actually considered by the senate. FIRST READING.
3.11 Support of the Doctorate in Nursing Practice in the CSU. Requests that the Chancellor and the
BOT jointly develop a legislative proposal for the CSU to offer an independent Doctorate of
Nursing Practice (DNP). Affirms that DNP Programs offered by the CSU must be developed and
approved by faculty through regular governance processes at all individual campuses offering the
DNP degree. Affirms that all proposed DNP Programs be developed in accordance with all
appropriate national standards for such applied doctoral programs. Urges the CSU to secure funding
sufficient to sustain and implement DNP Programs. Commends the CSU’s leadership in recognizing
the need to address the serious shortage of nursing faculty in California through the development of
independent DNP Programs. FIRST READING.
3.12 The Collegiate Learning Assessment (CLA). Agrees in principle that a voluntary system of
accountability serves as one strategy to provide the public with information about learning outcomes
and other comparable issues. Affirms that the CSU should continue to administer the CLA for the
current pilot commitment of two years. Requests that data from the CLA be provided to all CSU
institutions in a format that provides meaningful information on student learning outcomes to be
used in the development of quality assessment programs. Asks that the results of the two-year pilot
of the CLA be assessed by CSU faculty as part of developing comprehensive plans for the
assessment of student learning. Recommends that additional student learning assessment
instruments be developed and evaluated by faculty for use with or instead of the CLA as elements of
a comprehensive plan to assess student learning outcomes. FIRST READING.
3.13 Response to Governor’s Budget Recommendations. Finds that the Governor’s proposed
budget for the State of California would produce serious negative implications for the CSU.
Resolves that the Governor be made aware that his budget proposal would deny student access and
delay graduation due to the anticipated reduction in course offerings. Notes that the CSU still has
not recovered from the more than 500 million dollars in budget reductions from past years. Reminds
the Governor that the CSU has served extraordinary numbers of students who would not otherwise
be served largely at the expense of additional unfunded work by faculty. Holds that a unified
message regarding these implications ought to be delivered to the legislature by the BOT, CSU
System Office, the leadership on the 23 campuses, the ASCSU, CSSA, CFA, and other bargaining
agents. Finds that existing research indicates that investment in higher education is advantageous to
the public good for both civic and economic reasons where every dollar invested produced four
dollars for the California economy. Endorses the need for the CSU to remain accessible to displaced
or unemployed individuals who are seeking to upgrade their marketability through obtaining a college
degree. Urges the Governor and Legislature to restore the unallocated reduction to the budget of the
CSU that appears in the Governor’s January Budget Proposal. Urges the BOT and the Chancellor to
work with the Governor and Legislature to effect that restoration. FIRST READING WAIVED.
PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
3.14 Criteria for Evaluating Systemwide Program Fee Proposals. Urges the BOT to adopt the
following criteria when considering proposals to increase systemwide program fees: Program Cost,
Critical State Needs, Enhanced Income Potential, Career Enhancement vs. Entry, Availability of
Options, Access, and Assessment. FIRST READING.
7
3.16 Support for the California State University Request to Delay Implementation of the New
State Mandated Teacher Performance Assessments. Supports Chancellor Reed’s request to ask
the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing to delay the implementation of the Teacher
Performance Assessment portion of Senate Bill 1209 until funding for implementation is provided.
FIRST READING.
3.17 Principles and Priorities to Guide the Allocation of Potential Budget Reductions. Opposes
the reductions in the general fund support for the CSU identified in the Governor’s proposed 200809 budget. States that priority should be given to protecting academic programs – the primary focus
of the CSU mission – and that reductions be directed, where possible, to other areas of the CSU
budget. Offers principles that should be adopted in the allocation of budget reductions within the
CSU. FIRST READING.