CSU, SACRAMENTO

2009-10

FACULTY SENATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

MINUTES

December 1, 2009

3:00-5:00 p.m.

Sacramento Hall, Room 275

Present: Buckley, Cuevas, Hecsh, Krabacher, Lang, McCurley, Miller, Peigahi, Sheppard, Siegler, Sobredo, Taylor, Wagner, Wanket

Guests: Mike Lee

MEETING OVERVIEW:

  1. Minutes from November 17 – the minutes were approved as amended.
  2. Open forum:

·  Peigahi asked Wagner what the timeline is for replacing Peter Lau, the university’s recently retired Director of Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action. Wagner advised that the updated job description will be available for review on 12/8. A faculty representative will be needed for the search committee.

·  Krabacher asked if the course proposal process could be streamlined, as programs are trying to adjust budget reductions. Mike Lee stated that the current process used by the Curriculum Subcommittee should be able to handle any uptake in requests for changes.

·  Wanket asked what the status is of the Alcohol Advisory Council. An update will be provided on 12/8.

·  Lang expressed opposition to the presence of Christmas trees on campus, since the university is a public institution.

·  Cuevas stated that CSU ASIs are organizing a march for March 23, 2010. Sheppard recommended that ASI provide this information as an information item if they want faculty support and involvement.

  1. Chair’s business:

·  Senate calendar – Sheppard recommended dates for Senate meetings for Spring 2010. The Committee approved the dates. Since the first meeting would be January 28, Sheppard asked members about their tentative availability for an EC meeting the week prior. Members tentatively agreed upon Tuesday, 1/19 (depending on availability of space). A couple of items to be discussed are the structure of the Senate in relation to funding; by-laws.

·  Faculty Endowment for Student Scholarships – Sheppard announced that the investment return is insufficient for making the minimum number of awards. A request has been made to the UEI Executive Committee for bridge funding so that the Senate can make the same number of awards as given out last year. Colleges have received similar bridge funding for scholarships in their respective areas. Hecsh asked why the invitation for applications went out if there wasn’t sufficient funding. Siegler asked why the investment income was insufficient, given the recovery of the stock market. Siegler recommended that the Senate request a report from UEI about how the funds are invested.

·  Commencement – Sheppard announced that due to health issues, he cannot attend commencements. Taylor is attending some of the commencements, but EC members were invited to represent the Senate, and if available, coordinate with Taylor.

·  Collegiate Learning Assessment – Sheppard stated that the Collegiate Learning Assessment has been mandated by the Chancellor’s Office annually. Mike Lee stated that the campus is doing the assessments on incoming freshmen and graduating seniors. The assessment is 90 minutes. Academic Affairs must get permission from the instructor to do the assessment, which is done outside of class time.

·  Graduate Advisory Council’s FTEs reduction recommendations – the Committee reviewed and discussed the GAC’s recommendations to Chevelle Newsome, Dean of Graduate Studies. Newsome forwarded the recommendations to Provost Sheley, who then forwarded them to Sheppard. Sheley requested time on the Senate agenda for 12/3 for the recommendations as an information item. Discussion focused on: are the recommendations policy, process, the charge and scope of GAC, the alignment of the recommendations with the 1991 “Instructional Program Priorities, Guidelines for Academic Planning, Resource Allocation, and Enrollment Management”, the purview of the Senate vs. an advisory council and why GSPC wasn’t consulted. Because Sheley was absent, the Committee was uncertain as to his intentions on the recommendations. Lee stated that he believed that Sheley’s request for the recommendations to be an information item at the Senate was to get the conversation moving, as budget decisions need to be made quickly. Siegler stated that the colleges and department chairs received a copy of the recommendations, so the recommendations are being circulated across campus, and that the perception is that the recommendations are being implemented. The Committee requested that Sheppard communicate with Sheley about its concerns and the likely negative reaction that will be communicated at the Senate.

·  Readmissions – Juanita Barrena raised the issue at Open Forum at the Senate a couple of weeks ago of the campus not accepting petitions for readmissions for Spring 2010. There is concern that this bar may extend beyond Spring 2010. McCurley stated that readmission petitions are not being accepted for disqualifications and dismissals. Buckley and McCurley pointed to an Executive Order from the Chancellor’s Office, designating academically disqualified/dismissed students as being low priority. McCurley stated that these students aren’t being allowed to petition so that they will not be charged the filing fee. Sheppard asked the Committee if it would like to introduce a resolution on the matter. The Committee deferred, citing the lack of sufficient time to draft such a resolution adequately.

·  Priority registration – Sheppard called the Committee’s attention to a complaint a student relayed to Senate office staff regarding registration priorities. Specifically, there is a category of special programs that includes athletes, athletic trainers, honors program, marching band, cheerleaders and dance team, residence hall advisors, among others, that are allowed to register prior to graduate seniors. Veterans and disabled students are first and second, respectively. Sheppard advised the Committee that he would like the priorities reviewed at a future date.

  1. CODE report – the Committee responded directly to the following recommendations:

·  “…diversifying departmental search/hiring committees and allowing faculty from other departments to participate in these committees so as to reduce the bias of favoring sameness (i.e. persons from the same cultural background, theoretical/methodological orientations, and other social orientations)” – departments already use faculty from other departments for search committees. No further action recommended.

·  “…for the university to use regional numbers to assess the adequacy of the applicant pool as opposed to national average numbers…” – Wagner advised that labor laws don’t allow using regional data for faculty search, where national and international data are used. Regional data is used for staff searches.

·  “…the university may want to invest time and resources in orienting its teaching/services to meet the needs of our normative students at Sacramento State…” – the Committee agreed to refer this recommendation to President Gonzalez and Provost Sheley, as they are drafting a proposal to send to the Chancellor’s Office for improving graduation rates.

·  “We need to be involved and included on important committees and discussions that deal with university policy and programs that affect qualify and access to education for our diverse student populations.” – After discussion, the Committee recommended that CODE members sign up for those university and Senate committees fitting this recommendation through the Senate’s preference poll and identify themselves as CODE members.

·  “CODE urgently recommends the Executive Committee to include a CODE member in its committee meetings.” – After discussion, the Committee agreed to add CODE’s chair in all Executive Committee communications, as is the practice with the chair of the University ARTP Committee.

  1. Policy Committee referrals – Buckley reported that APC is discussing unit caps as a way to manage enrollment. Sheppard asked if the grade appeal amendments can be ready for first reading at the Senate meeting of January 28, 2010. Buckley stated that he would try but needed to have APC review the final changes once more.
  2. Student Fee Advisory Committee – Sheppard reported that there have been changes to the composition of the Student Fee Advisory Committee, necessitating a change in faculty representation. The Faculty Senate appointed 2 representatives to the committee. The new composition calls for one of the representatives to be the Senate chair (or designee) and a faculty member appointed by the President (presumably, as recommended by the Senate). Sheppard has asked President Gonzalez if he is amenable to appointing one of the current faculty representatives as his appointee, and Sheppard will appoint the other as his designee.
  3. Senate meeting for 12/3 – the Committee discussed how it might tackle the topic of priorities/values/goals again; budget 101; Academic Affairs budget; using the Baccalaureate Learning Goals as a concept, but expanded to be university goals vs. strictly focused on undergraduate education; using the original list of academic priorities but asking senators to rank order them from high to low priority.