Please bring your March 11, 2004 Faculty Senate Agenda Attachments C and C-1

2003 - 04 
FACULTY SENATE
California State University, Sacramento

AGENDA
Thursday, March 25, 2004
Foothill Suite, University Union

MOMENT OF SILENCE

ROBERT EISNER Emeritus Faculty Foreign Languages 1967 - 2004

DICK PAYNE Continuing Education

OPEN FORUM

BUDGET UPDATE

CONSENT CALENDAR

CONSENT ACTION

The Faculty Senate recommends approval of the program change proposals found at Attachment A.

Note:  At its meeting of February 19, 2004, the Faculty Senate removed FS 04-10 from the consent calendar and recommitted it back to the Curriculum Subcommittee.  The Curriculum Subcommittee responded to the concerns of the Senate in Attachment B. 

[addition = underscore; deletion = strikethrough]

The Faculty Senate recommends approval of the following program change proposal:

American Sign Language

The current Certificate in ASL requires only completion of EDS 150-152 (ASL 1-3: Beginning to Intermediate). These three courses also correlate with the Foreign Language requirement at CSUS. Currently, students are basically rewarded with a certificate for simply completing their Foreign Language requirement. In addition, the current level now allows students to receive the Certificate after having completed only intermediate level coursework in ASL. It is proposed that the requirement be raised to include completion of EDS 153 (ASL 4: Advanced ASL: Instructing and Informing). In addition, students will be required to have completed at least 7 units of ASL, including EDS 153, at CSUS in order to receive a Certificate. Further, a minimum grade of "C" or better G.P.A. of 2.0 must be maintained in each of the four courses for receipt of the certificate. With this change, it is felt that the Certificate will have more value to its holders and prospective employers examining candidates’ credentials.

REGULAR AGENDA

SECOND READING

Background:  The current Foreign Language Proficiency Requirement was created by the August 1991 Policy on General Education. In the last decade there has been considerable debate about the usefulness and intent of this requirement. Many have pointed out that only one other CSU campus has a Foreign Language requirement that is significantly greater than the CSU entry requirement. To clarify faculty expectations and in order to prepare assessment plans for the requirement, learning goals were developed by the GE Policies/Graduation Requirements Committee, in consultation with the departments offering courses that currently meet the requirements. The Senate unanimously passed the Foreign Language Graduation Requirement Course Learning Goals (March 11, 2004 Faculty Senate Agenda Attachment C) in October of 2003 (FS 03-39).

With this motion, the Senate is being asked to essentially change the foreign language requirement from requiring three semesters to two semesters of a college level foreign language. As is currently the case, students can choose one of a number of options for fulfilling the requirement either before or after enrolling. The GE Policies/Graduation Requirements Committee, in recommending this change, proposes to correct previous inconsistencies while being true to the newly approved learning goals. It is the position of the Committee that the following improvements would be made if the recommendations are approved

1. Correcting the mismatch of high school credit to university credit. Three years of high school foreign language will now be equivalent to two semesters of university study.
    
2. Allowing students who have strong cultural and clear speaking mastery of a language (like a first generation American who speaks but does not write or read a foreign language) to meet the requirement.
    
3. Allowing American Sign Language students a testing option not available when reading and writing were required skills to be tested.

It is important to note that if the proposed changes are approved, additional study in foreign languages will still be required beyond the university’s entry requirements. This is additional study that is NOT required, as indicated above, at 21 other CSU campuses in the CSU.

This motion will be presented by Jackie Donath, chair of the GE Policies and Graduation Requirements Committee. In addition, representatives from Foreign Language and American Sign Language will be present to respond to the proposed changes.

The Faculty Senate recommends amending the Foreign Language Graduation Requirement as outlined in the March 11, 2004 Faculty Senate Agenda Attachment C-1.

FIRST READING

BACKGROUND: When a student receives a WU grade, that grade is treated as an “F” for purposes of GPA determination. Under current WU grade policy allows students to petition to have deleted from their GPA calculation the first-semester WU grade(s) they receive at CSUS*. All WU grades received in subsequent semesters will be used in the determination of their GPA. As the policy now stands, however, students must submit their petition within six months of having received the grade.

The reason the provision to allow students petition was originally added to the WU grade policy was primarily educative. Many students are not, at least initially, familiar with university drop policies and their responsibilities under them, and thus may unknowingly end up with WU grades on their transcript. At the time, students receiving their first WU grades would receive written notification of this and of their right to petition in the mail along with their semester grades. The purpose of six-month deadline was to spur students to act quickly and in so doing educate themselves on university drop procedures before they earn subsequent WU grades.

The recommended language does two things. First, it eliminates the six-month deadline. Under the new language students may petition to have their first-semester WU grades removed at the time during their enrollment at CSUS. If the student does not file such a petition, the WU grades will be automatically deleted from GPA calculation at the time of the student’s graduation.

Arguments for and against can be found at Attachment C.

* The term ”first-semester WU grade(s)” refers to those WU grades received during the semester at CSUS in which the student first receives a WU grade.

The Faculty Senate recommends that the CSUS policy on administration of the WU grades be amended to read as follows:

“Students may petition to have all WU grades dropped from GPA calculation for the first semester in which they receive a WU at any point up to the time of degree conferral. If a student does not petition for the removal of first semester WU grades the will be deleted from GPA calculations at time of graduation.”

BACKGROUND. Amendments to the Constitution go into effect only after being approved by 1) a majority of the members of the faculty-at-large voting on the amendment, and 2) the President. However, approval of this motion by the Senate is necessary before this vote can occur. In fact, our Constitution requires a two-thirds (2/3) approval of the Senate before the amendment can be taken to the full faculty as an Initiative.

The proposed amendment would add non-voting members (administrators and staff) to the Senate’s membership. Administrators and staff did serve as non-voting members on our Senate until 1997 when the Constitution was changed. At that time of this change, the Academic Senate was renamed the Faculty Senate.

This change was motivated, not by a philosophical debate, but by a highly charged conflict that erupted between the faculty and administration. In fact, the amendment was not sent to faculty after debate and two-thirds approval of the Senate, but went directly to the faculty-at-large for a vote. In this case, the Constitution provides for a second method for taking a proposed amendment to the faculty, that is, through an initiative petition signed by 20% of the faculty.

The “culture” on our campus is much different than it was in 1997. There is a new administration, which is eager to work collaboratively with faculty, staff and students and to add to, expand and improve those processes that provide for consultation and engage the faculty in shared governance. Furthermore, our faculty has undergone a rather exciting and dynamic transformation with well over half of the faculty arriving after 1997. This change, in many ways, is symbolic; reconnecting faculty, administration and staff in debate and discussion involving the academic life of our University and our dedication to the teaching and learning of our students. This amendment would reestablish a practice that is the standard throughout the CSU. Only two other campuses exclude administrators and staff as non-voting members of their Senates. My understanding is that this exclusion in both these cases occurred as result of a breakdown in collegiality and collaboration.

This motion is unanimously endorsed by the Executive Committee.

A comparison of the pre-1997, post-1997 and the proposed change are included as Attachment D.

The Faculty Senate approves the following amendment to the Constitution of the Faculty of CSU, Sacramento [strikeover = deletion; single underscore = addition]:

ARTICLE II. FACULTY ACADEMIC SENATE
Section 5. MEMBERSHIP.
A. The membership of the Academic Faculty Senate shall be composed of
(1) the representatives of the electing units;
(2) four representatives to be elected at-large by the temporary faculty from those temporary faculty who are teaching six or more units during the semester in which the election is conducted;
(3) chairs of certain standing committees of the Academic Faculty Senate (as specified in the committee's charge), as at-large voting members, unless such chairs are already serving on the Senate as representatives of the electing units;
(4) the statewide academic senators, as ex officio, non-voting members;
(5) the President or designee of the Emeritus Association of CSU, Sacramento, as an ex officio, non-voting member;
(6) three student representatives, as non-voting members, chosen by, and in a manner determined by, the Associated Students of CSUS;
(7) Vice President for Academic Affairs, Vice President for Human Resources and Vice President for Student Services as ex officio, non voting members;
(8) a College Dean, as ex officio, non voting member, chosen by, and in a manner determined by, the Vice President for Academic Affairs;
(9) two staff representatives, as non-voting members, chosen by, and in a manner determined by, the University Staff Assembly.

In each and every case of the term “Faculty Senate” appearing in the Constitution substitute the term “Academic Senate”.

---

The process for amending the Constitution: Approval of this proposed amendment first requires approval by two-thirds (2/3's) of the senators voting upon the motion. If approved, the amendment would then go to the full faculty in the form of an initiative. The amendment would go into affect only after approval by a majority of the members of the faculty voting upon the amendment and subsequent approval by the President of the University.

References 1) Article IV. Section 2. Amendments to this Constitution; and 2) Article I. Organization, Section 4: Initiative and Referendum; A. Initiative.

INFORMATION

1. Faculty Senate's home page:  www.csus.edu/acse, or, from the CSUS home page, click on Administration and Policy, then Administration, then Faculty Senate.
2. Actions of the 2003-2004 Faculty Senate:  http://www.csus.edu/acse/03-04_actions.htm
3. Upcoming Senate meetings: 

April 1, 2004 - tentative April 8, 2004 - Spring break April 15, 2004 - 3:00-3:30: nomination of 2004-2005 Senate Officers; 3:30-5:00: 2003-2004 Senate meets April 22, 2004 - tentative

April 29, 2004 - 3:00-3:30: election of 2004-2005 Senate Officers; 3:30-5:00: 2003-2004 Senate meets Tuesday, May 4, 2004 - Outstanding Community Service and Lifetime Achievement Awards Reception May 6, 2004 - no meeting--Outstanding Teaching and Service Awards Reception May 13, 2004 - tentative