Attachment E
Faculty Senate Agenda
September 19, 2002

Summary of Commendations and Recommendations
Contained in the Program Review Report for the
Department of English

Commendations

1. Chair Mark Hennelly and Vice Chair Linda Palmer, along with all of the English Department faculty in TESOL, literature, composition, are to be highly commended for the extraordinary climate change from divisiveness to collegiality that has occurred in this department since the last program review.
   
2. The English Department is to be commended for moving TESOL's program and faculty from the margins to the mainstream of the department, and for changing the Department philosophy from one of divisiveness to one in which the English Department defines itself as a department that does literature, TESOL, and creative writing.
   
3. The English Department is to be commended for its strong TESOL program.
   
4. The Writing Programs Coordinator, Professor Amy Heckathorn, is to be commended for doing the work of two people with such excellence, energy, and commitment.
   
5. The English Department's impressive junior faculty are to be commended for carrying the lion's share of the incredibly heavy supervisory workloads.
   
6. The English Department faculty is to be commended for its deep commitment to students and to student-led creative activities.
   
7. Professor Mark Hennelly is to be commended for providing an extraordinary example of the teacher-scholar who also spends countless hours performing service responsibilities for his department, college, and university.
   
8. The English Department Writing Program Coordinator and the Learning Skills Program Director are to be commended for working together to address the problems (plagiarism and dropping out of classes) that ESL students were having in English 20.
   
9. The English department is to be commended for reaching out to its students through its annual fall orientation and spring graduation activities.
   
10. The English Education Program is to be commended for the large number of students it teaches and advises each semester.

Recommendations to the English Department

1. The program review team recommends that within the next three years, the English Department develop and submit to the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs, a clearly articulated mission statement. (pp. 2, 31)
   
2. The program review team recommends that within the next academic year, the English Department finalize its Constitutional changes vis-à-vis formally establishing Department Chair consecutive term limits. (pp. 7, 41)
   
3. The program review team recommends that within the next year, the Department develop a tentative two-year schedule of course offerings for graduate students which (a) rotates required and elective classes between daytime and evening/Saturday offerings and (b) offers a reasonable schedule of summer courses in order to enable students working full-time and attending graduate school outside the work day to make more timely progress toward completing the degree. (p. 9)
   
4. The program review team recommends that each semester the Department review the graduate course offerings to ensure that required classes (e.g., 240 and 250) are not taught at the same day and time. (p. 9)
   
5. The program review team recommends that within the next two years, the English Department revise (in consultation with the Dean of Faculty and Staff Affairs and/or the Director of Faculty and Staff affairs) its current part-time hiring procedures. (p. 40)
   
6. The program review team recommends that the English Department revise its faculty evaluation (RTP/Post Tenure Review) policy to require evaluation of the classes of all part-time faculty and all tenure-track at least once a year each year, and to evaluate the classes of all tenured faculty at least once every five years (i.e. as part of each five-year post-tenure review process). (p. 40)
   
7. The program review team recommends that within the next two years the English Department consider addressing the inequitable service burden of full-time faculty and effectively utilizing the experience, expertise and ongoing service obligations of FERPing faculty by assigning FERPing faculty to implement their service obligations by conducting class visitations in the classes of all part-time faculty once every year, and as part of those visits, completing a (standard format) classroom teaching evaluation report (to be developed by the Department RPT committee). (p. 41)
   
8. The program review team recommends that the Department of English assign several ESL-trained tutors to ESL-sensitive English-20 classes. (pp. 14, 26)
   
9. The review team recommends that within the next three years the Department try offering several sections of early morning (i.e., 7:30-8:45 a.m.) classes its majors take (i.e., class other than such GE/service classes as English 1 and English 20). We further recommend that if these classes fill, that the Department add more early morning classes to the schedule. The review team also recommends that within the next three years, the English Department revise the rotation of English Department major [not GE/service] courses so that roughly 1/3 of the classes offered for English majors fall on T/TH, 1/3 on MW, and 1/3 in the evenings, and that these classes be rotated so that over the course of three semesters each of these classes rotates among the day parts. The review team further recommends that the department increase the number of required and elective undergraduate classes offered in the evening (i.e., after 5:30 or 6:00 p.m.), and that the department devise a schedule that ensures that at least once every three semesters at least one section of all required undergraduate classes (especially single section classes), as well as a reasonable number of elective classes, are offered in the evening (i.e., after 5:30 p.m.). Lastly, the review team recommends that the department post this course rotation outside the English Department office, outside the Graduate Coordinator's office, and on the department's website. (pp. 9, 10, 17)
   
10. The program review team recommends that the English Department establish and implement within the next three years a course rotation that regularly rotates graduate classes both across days (T/TH and M/W) and across day parts (morning, afternoon, evening). Such a rotation should ensure that at least once every three semesters single section classes are offered in the evening after 6:00 p.m. The program review team further recommends that the department post this course rotation outside the English Department office, outside the Graduate Coordinator's office, and on the department's website. (pp. 9, 10, 18)
    
11. The program review team recommends that the English Department offer additional graduate course offerings during the summer to serve all its graduate students, including teachers working on non-TESOL graduate degrees. (pp. 9, 10, 18)
    
12. The program review team recommends that English Department offer tutorial assistance for majors for more hours with more tutors, including more graduate student tutors. (p. 19)
    
13. The program review team recommends that the English Department consider developing several day-long workshops (e.g., one on writing a thesis, another on writing a project, another on studying and taking comprehensive examinations) which the Graduate Coordinator could offer for course credit at least once a year (and preferably once a semester) on Saturdays so both full-time and part-time students can attend. (p. 20)
    
14. The program review team recommends that the English Department (a) provide 3 units of summer assigned time to the graduate coordinator to enable the graduate coordinator to advise incoming graduate students and assemble and mail essential orientation materials, and (b) provide ten hours a week of clerical/administrative assistance for the graduate coordinator. (p. 20)
    
15. The program review team recommends that the English Department actively develop a mechanism for providing more formal career advising to its graduate and undergraduate students. (p. 22)
    
16. The program review team recommends that the English Department review and reconsider making 100A and 100B pre-requisites for admission to graduate study in literature in the English Department. (p. 23)
    
17. The program review team recommends that prior to developing a course rotation for the next two years, the English Department faculty (a) discuss ways in which faculty teaching graduate literature seminars could incorporate literary theory into existing courses, (b) discuss ways in which multiculturalism can be better incorporated into current literature seminars, and use this information to (c) revise current graduate (and perhaps even some undergraduate) literature seminars to ensure the integration of theoretical approaches and ethnic and multicultural literatures, into existing graduate literature courses that examine authors, genres, topics, and literary periods. (pp. 15, 25, 30, 32)
    
18. The program review team recommends that as new faculty are hired, these new faculty should be given the highest priority in teaching graduate seminars, and that for graduate and other literature seminars, second priority should be given to junior and senior faculty who are well-grounded in literary theory and have demonstrated disciplinary currency through involvement in regional, national, and international scholarly associations, juried competitions, and/or publishing. (pp. 25, 30, 32)
    
19. The program review team recommends that the department eliminate vestiges of sexism and racism from course names and that the curriculum committee actively develop, promote, offer more courses that integrate multicultural literatures and mainstream literatures. (pp. 15, 32)
    
20. The program review team recommends that the English Department develop and acquire approval of four courses that cover these areas-Teaching Reading, Teaching Writing with Technology, Testing and Assessment, and Teaching ESL Composition-within the next three years. (pp. 24, 32)
    
21. The program review team affirms the recommendation of the outside consultant that more units of real, not de facto, released time to given in the areas of composition, English Education, and graduate study. (p. 28)
    
22. The program review team concurs with the recommendation of Consultant Bendixen (Appendix C, p. 8) that the department engage someone from outside the department to further assess the nature and scope of the problem of lack of currency and effective pedagogy among some faculty and to assist the department in addressing this problem. (pp. 29, 30)
    
23. Given the exceeding low level of ethnic and gender diversity among the department's students, and the important statement made by the presence of ethnic faculty, the program review team recommends that the department make an exceptionally vigorous effort to maximize the likelihood that a preponderance of its new hires in the next five years are from diverse ethnic backgrounds. (p. 30)
    
24. The program review team recommends that the department gather and provide summative information for each of the types of classes (undergraduate literature, graduate literature, composition, teacher preparation, and creative writing) for each semester in the next Self-Study. (p. 31)
    
25. The program review team recommends that the Department Chair, Vice Chair, and Executive Committee provide the full-time department faculty with twice-yearly summary budget information. (p. 39)

Recommendations to the English Department, the Dean of Arts and Letters, and the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs

1. The program review team recommends that within the next year the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs meet with the English Department and the Dean of Arts and Letters (a) to discuss the university's fiscal responsibility in providing sufficient funding to enable the Writing Center to support a full-time administrative assistant, (preferably at least five) additional paid tutors, new or updated computers and printers, and an annual line-item budget adequate to support the paper, printer ribbons, pens/pencils, etc. that the Writing Center uses in tutoring and in the annual publication of the Writing Center Newsletter, and (b) along with the new WRAD Coordinator, to clarify the relationship among the English Department, the Writing Center, and the University-wide required writing programs and support services. (pp. 22, 35)
   
2. We recommend that the English Department work with the Dean of Arts and Letters and to request (in conjunction with the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs, in light of the departments enhanced administrative responsibilities due to the university requirement of English 20) the hiring of an additional staff member for the English Department within the next two years. (pp. 12, 22, 25, 28)
   
3. The program review team recommends that the English Department and the Dean of Arts and Letters work with the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs to provide university funding for coordinator responsibilities for university Writing Programs (i.e., 6 units of assigned time per semester, and 3 units of assigned time during the summer for the Writing Programs coordinator; 3 units of assigned time during each academic semester and during the summer for a new English 20 coordinator; 3 units of assigned time during each semester and 3 units during the summer for the Writing Center Coordinator and the Basic Writing Coordinator). (pp. 25, 28, 37)
   
4. The program review team recommends that the English Department be authorized to hire at least one additional tenure-track positions in rhetoric and composition within the next two years to assist in teaching and administering the various writing courses, services, and programs which the English Department operates. (pp. 25, 28, 37)
   
5. The program review team recommends that the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Dean of Arts and Letters (a) survey faculty and students in the English Department (and perhaps other departments where complaints about poorly maintained classroom facilities, such as Mendocino 1003) about their experience with and knowledge of the state of repair/disrepair of classroom, laboratory (i.e., the writing classrooms and the Writing Center), and library media services facilities and service responsiveness (e.g., how long do classrooms remain unrepaired and the equipment unusable in your classes), and (b) appoint a knowledgeable expert from another college or administrative entity other than Arts and Letters and Media Services to examine existing Arts and Letters classroom facilities in Calaveras, Douglass, Mendocino, Riverside, etc. and the availability of faculty equipment training programs for "smart classroom" facilities. (pp. 34, 36)
   
6. The program review team recommends that the English Department, the Dean of Arts and Letters, and the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs, meet yearly to clarify the lines of income and dispersal (i.e., the source, budget, and expenditure of direct and indirect faculty and operational funding--including paper, copying machines, computers, staff time, etc.) for English 20 to ensure that the English Department is not absorbing the cost of this university program at the expense of its other programs. (pp. 25, 35, 38)
   
7. The program review team recommends that the English Department work with the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Dean of the College of Arts and Letters to (a) provide sufficient funding to the Writing Center to support a full-time administrative assistant, (preferably five) additional paid experienced tutors, new computers and printers, and an annual budget adequate to support the paper, printer ribbons, pens/pencils, etc. that the Writing Center and the annual Writing Center Newsletter use, and (b) with the new WRAD Coordinator, review the fiscal relationship between the English Department and the university-wide services the Writing Center provides. (pp. 25, 35)

Recommendations to the English Department and the Dean of the College of Arts and Letters

1. The program review team recommends that the Dean of Arts and Letters confer with the Arts and Letters Budget Committee to ascertain the conditions under which these committees will be receptive to approving additional GE courses offered by the English Department, and should discuss this information with the English Department in the context of reviewing the English Department's GE FTE targets. (p. 4)
   
2. The program review team recommends that the Dean of Arts and Letters work with the English Department to provide upgrades to staff computers.
   
3. The program review team recommends that prior to the end of the 2001-2002 academic year, the Dean of Arts and Letters inform the English Department faculty of the anticipated timeline for the construction of new facilities for the English Department. (pp. 34, 37)
   
4. The program review team recommends that English Department work with the Dean of the College of Arts and Letters (a) to find more temporary offices space for the faculty, (b) to advocate expediting the position of the English Department on the campus building plan), (c) to increase the number of classrooms with sufficient space for group activity that are available for use by writing classes), (d) to provide the composition faculty with a new server and additional computers for part-time faculty and TAs, and (e) to provide a reasonably-sized drop-in advising office, complete with computer, where staff and faculty can access SIS and continue the current GE advising that they do, and where student peer advisors can assist both English majors and nonmajor students. (pp. 19, 35, 36)
   
5. The program review team recommends that the Dean of the College of Arts and Letters work with the English Department, in consultation with Facilities Management, find a way of providing additional temporary office space for the English Department staff and English Department offices. The program review team further recommends that the Dean advocate expediting the position of the English Department on the campus building plan. (pp. 35, 37)

Recommendation to the English Department, the Dean of the College of Arts and Letters, the Dean of Faculty and Staff Affairs, and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs

The review team recommends that a committee be formed-one which includes the new WRAD coordinator, the English Department Chair and Vice Chair, the Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs, the Writing Programs Coordinator, the Basic Writing Coordinator, the Writing Center Coordinator, the TESOL Coordinator, the Director of the Learning Skills Center, and the Associate Dean of Arts and Letters, with input from the Dean of Faculty and Staff Affairs-to discuss the advantages and disadvantages, including the RTP implications, of hiring full-time lecturers to teach composition classes in the English Department. (p. 28)

Recommendation to the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs

The Review Team recommends that the Vice President for Academic Affairs confer with Institutional Studies to ascertain either why clear, appropriate records are not being kept, or posted on the institutional studies website, and to direct institutional studies to revise its record keeping and to provide the English Department with appropriate comparative university data, and also appropriate department, college, and university data on WPE passage rates (as required by the Program Review Report, s. v. "Students Characteristics 7." (pp. 16, 17)

Recommendations to the English Department, the Dean of the College of Arts and Letters, and the Dean of Faculty and Staff Affairs

1. The program review team recommends that before proceeding with further requests to hire individuals to fill part-time program administrative responsibilities, the English Department seek clarification from the Dean of Arts and Letter and the Dean of Faculty and Staff Affairs about all policies (including policies relating to hiring, retention, promotion, and merit increases, tenure, and entitlements vis-à-vis part-time administrative duties) relating to part-time faculty holding administrative positions. (p. 6)
   
2. The program review team recommends that, before the Department proceeds with hiring full-time lecturers CSUS, the Department seek and receive a formal statement clarifying university policies on matters relating to hiring, retention, tenure, promotion, and entitlements of lecturers and lecturers whose appointments might be renewed from the Dean of Faculty and Staff Affairs. (p. 6)

Recommendations to the English Department, the Dean of Arts and Letters, and the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs

1. The program review team recommends that the Dean of Arts and Letters work with the English Department, the Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, and SPAG to enlarge or provide more adequate office space within the English building for the English department support staff during the years until the current buildings are demolished and the department is moved to new facilities. (p. 35)
   
2. The program review team concurs with the recommendation of the outside consultant that English Department actively seek college and university approval to hire a minimum of ten new faculty over the next five years. (p. 27)

Recommendation to the Faculty Senate

The program review team recommends that the Department of English and its current academic degree and credential programs be approved for six years or until the next program review.