2001-2002 FACULTY SENATE
California State University, Sacramento

AGENDA
May 2, 2002
Foothill Suite, Union
3:00 - 5:00 p.m.

OPEN FORUM

CONSENT ITEMS

The nominees will be forwarded to the President for personal interviews and selection of one appointee to serve a four-year term.

CSUS Foundation Board
Cecil Canton, H&HS
Rhonda Rios Kravitz, LIB
Ramzi Mahmood, E&CS
Anne Stewart, H&HS

Background:  Recommendation #1 to the Faculty Senate requests that the Faculty Senate "Provide sufficient support to the department for its pursuit of the AuD program."  FS 01-84, Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical Audiology, Request to Negotiate was approved by the Senate on December 6, 2001, supporting the pursuit of the AuD program.

The Faculty Senate receives the recommendations (Attachment A) of the Curriculum Policies Committee on the program review of the Department of Speech Pathology and Audiology and recommends that the Bachelor of Science Degree and the Master's Degree in Speech Pathology and Audiology be approved for six years.

Background:  During open forum at the April 4, 2002 Senate meeting, Senator Ted Lascher (Public Policy and Administration) raised the issue of the distribution of Research and Creative Activity Awards and the seemingly disproportionate number of awards given to one college and the lack of any awards given to another.  Senator Lascher recommended the creation of an ad hoc committee to review the current procedures and recommend options for ensuring that proposals are evaluated uniformly and distributed more equitably across the seven colleges.  Charlotte Xanders, Chair of the Research and Creative Activities Subcommittee, met with the Executive Committee on April 23 and concurred with the creation of such an ad hoc committee.

The Faculty Senate recommends the establishment of an ad hoc Committee on the Distribution of Research and Creative Activity Awards (Attachment B).

Ad Hoc Committee on Distribution of Research and Creative Activity Awards

Arts and Letters
Julie Yen, English and Faculty Policies Committee liaison to the Research and Creative Activities Subcommittee

Business Administration
Stephen Crow, Accountancy and member of Faculty Policies Committee

Education
Theresa Roberts, Teacher Education

Engineering and Computer Science
Cui Zhang, Computer Science

Health and Human Services
Alan Hreljac, Kinesiology and Health Science

Natural Sciences and Mathematics
Suzanne Lindgren, Biological Sciences

Social Sciences and Interdisciplinary Studies
Tammy Bourg, Psychology

General Education Policies/Graduation Requirements Committee
Raul Rodriguez, Teacher Education, Senator, 2003

REGULAR AGENDA

Approval of the Minutes of April 25 (#25), 2002.

SECOND READING
[Action may be taken.]

The Faculty Senate recommends approval of the following:

WHEREAS,	CSUS is committed to the development of quality educational programs, excellence in teaching, and providing service to the community, and
WHEREAS,	at CSUS, a baccalaureate education is based on several principles, including the expectation that all students will explore the body of human knowledge and become familiar with various methods for gaining, evaluating and extending that knowledge, and such an education should facilitate students' range of knowledge, values and skills in ways that will that will enrich and shape their lives, and
WHEREAS,	an explicit University Goal (Strategic Plan, 2nd edition, 1998, p.10) establishes the "educational mission. . . through continued implementation of effective and efficient practices," and,
WHEREAS,	assessment is an integral part of the teaching and learning process, evaluation and discussion of our progress toward that goal led to the adoption and implementation of a University Assessment Policy by the Faculty Senate in 1992, and
WHEREAS,	University-wide assessment of institutional educational effectiveness requires assessment at a broad, University-level, and
WHEREAS,	through a wide-ranging collaborative process, the Faculty Senate prepared six general baccalaureate learning goals for all undergraduates, and
WHEREAS,	meaningful assessment and efforts to improve the institution depend on communicating clearly defined faculty expectations for learning, therefore be it
RESOLVED	that the Faculty Senate adopts the attached "CSUS Baccalaureate Learning Goals", prepared by the Faculty Senate Working Group on University Learning Goals which includes definitions for each of the following expectations of undergraduate learning: Competence In The Disciplines  Analysis And Problem-Solving  Communication  Information Competence  Cultural Legacies  Values And Pluralism and be it further
RESOLVED	that the Faculty Senate recommends the "CSUS Baccalaureate Learning Goals" serve as a definition of the University's expectations for undergraduate learning for all undergraduate students, and be it further
RESOLVED	that the Faculty Senate recommends that these "CSUS Baccalaureate Learning Goals" be incorporated into the University's Strategic Plan, and be it further
RESOLVED	that the Faculty Senate directs the Curriculum Policies Committee to develop an assessment plan that specifies an ongoing, cyclical process that will guide the University in meeting these expectations of undergraduate learning at California State University, Sacramento.

FIRST READING

[10 minute time limited discussion-unless extended by majority vote; no action]

[William Dillon]

Background:  Currently, the University ARTP document does not specifically reference activities associated with service learning, the development of public policy and assessment of programs and the results of student efforts to learn.  As described in Professor William Dillon's (Presiding Member, University ARTP Committee) April 16, 2002 memo to the Faculty Senate, the proposed changes would legitimize and allow units to include such activities in their evaluation process.  The March 25, 2002 memo from Charlotte Cook, Coordinator, Office of Community Collaboration, to the University ARTP Committee provides further background and rationale.

The Faculty Senate recommends amending Section 5.05 of the University ARTP document as shown in Attachment C.  

[William Dillon]

The Faculty Senate recommends amending Section 6.06.D of the University ARTP document as shown in Attachment D.

[Dick Kornweibel]

The Faculty Senate recommends the University 1) create the position of Director of General Education, which, in keeping with the importance of the GE program, shall be a 12-month, full-time MPP position reporting through the office of Academic Affairs and 2) adopt the position description for the Director of GE, which was developed by the GE Impact Study Workgroup (Attachment E).

Background (From the 2000-2001 General Education Program Review Report):

RECOMMENDATION 2. We recommend the university create the position of Director of GE, which, in keeping with the importance of the GE program, shall be a full-time MPP position with retreat rights reporting through the office of Academic Affairs. The GE director would have responsibility for coordinating and providing direction to the GE program, including assessment activities, learning communities, and the freshmen seminars, in accordance with policy determined by the GE Policy Committee and the university. While FTES shall remain with departments offering coursework, the Director in conjunction with the GE Policy Committee would have ultimate authority over the program's (1) course offerings and scheduling and (2) over whether courses and instructors meet GE objectives, area learning outcomes, and course standards as provided for in whatever new course approval and review process results from this report. As a reflection of the importance of GE on this campus, the Director should be included (ex officio) in meetings of the College Deans, and other significant policymaking bodies when appropriate. The General Education Impact Study Workgroup (see Recommendation No. 9) will be responsible for developing and recommending a budget appropriate for the effective operation of the GE office.

Discussion and Rationale: At least since the report of GERT-89 a serious argument has been advanced to centralize general education authority on this campus. A dean's position was created and filled from 1990 to 1995. Most recently, the program has had a coordinator with six units released time.

Generally speaking, despite often heroic efforts, since 1995 the GE coordinator has been reduced by circumstances to a weakened, part-time caretaker whose diminished authority has left the program pretty much at the mercy of far narrower vested interests, whether faculty or administrative. Without ultimate authority over course approval or review of program offerings, lacking a budget to respond to unforeseen scheduling challenges or initiate truly interdisciplinary offerings, absent even symbolic equivalency to other important academic administrators, the GE coordinator is expected to preside over a program consisting of more than 400 courses with neither the power nor the resources usually associated with a chair in the smallest of academic departments. The name of the coordinator does not even appear on the Directory in Sacramento Hall. Given present circumstances, the GE Coordinator, at best, can provide only superficial oversight, minimal accountability, and virtually no vision. Such an arrangement has no hope of guiding GE toward the kind of coherence, relevance, and excellence the campus says it wishes for a program, which is ritually proclaimed as "the heart of the university."

In addition to giving the GE leadership position the kind of prominence and authority it merits and without which the program will continue to languish, our recommendation would consolidate several key GE tasks that General Education Review Team Final Report are now sub-contracted out, specifically GE assessment and coordination of the learning communities.

We should point out that our recommendation is in complete accord with the thinking of GERT-89, the recommendation of this Team's external consultants, and the most recent self-study of the GE Committee.

Although it is not part of the formal recommendation, the Review Team strongly urges that should agreement be reached on this recommendation in the near term, the present coordinator assume the duties of Interim Director, perhaps with the beginning of spring semester 2002, while a search is conducted for a permanent director.

The Faculty Senate recommends adoption of the following:

WHEREAS:	in recent years the University has added a significant number of new professors to the faculty as a result of the many retirements that have occurred, and
WHEREAS:	projections of both faculty retirements and student enrollment growth in the coming years indicate that the number of new faculty will continue to grow, and
WHEREAS:	the RCAA Program supports the Strategic Plan's Scholarship goal to "build and support a university community whose excellence in teaching, learning, research and public service will be strengthened by scholarship", and
WHEREAS:	the CUP's 2002 objectives are to (1) increase the number of faculty and students who participate jointly in research and creative activity and (2) provide more opportunities for faculty to engage in scholarly and creative activity, and
WHEREAS:	increased support for faculty development is necessary to provide faculty with the resources to facilitate opportunities for research and scholarly activities, and
WHEREAS:	Over the years the Research and Creative Activities Awards Program has provided excellent opportunities for research and scholarly activities, and
WHEREAS:	at its peak, the Research and Creative Activities Awards Program received fifteen positions, the Senate's Faculty Policies Committee recommends that next year's funding of the Research and Creative Activities Awards Program be increased from four positions to a minimum of five positions with the goal of restoring funding to its former levels, therefore, be it
RESOLVED:	That the Faculty Senate request annual increases be made to the Research and Creative Activities Awards Program beginning with an increase in funding from four positions to a minimum five positions for the academic year 2002-2003.

[Tom Krabacher]

Background:  The policy is proposed out of concern about the difficulty faced by many students on academic probation in regaining academic good standing.  This challenge is often made more difficult when students on probation enroll for heavier than recommended course loads, academic advising to the contrary.  If implemented, this policy would automatically block students from enrolling for more than 14 units when not in good standing.

The Faculty Senate recommends adoption of the following policy:

Students who are on academic probation for two consecutive terms (including winter and summer terms) will be limited to a maximum course load of fourteen (14) units a semester until they achieve academic good standing.

INFORMATION:

1. Senate Home Page:  http:/www.csus.edu/acse or, from the CSUS home page, click on Administration and Policy, then Administration, then Faculty Senate.

2. Livingston Lecture nominations - deadline to submit nominations to the Faculty Senate office is Friday, May 3, 3:00 p.m.

3. Outstanding Teaching and Service Awards Reception:  Tuesday, May 7, 3:00-5:00 p.m., Union Ballroom III

4. Meeting Schedule:

• May 9, 2002:
  3:00-3:30:  2002/03 Senate Elections
  3:30-5:00:  2001/02 Senate meeting (last meeting of the year)