2005-2006 FACULTY SENATE
California State University, Sacramento

AGENDA
Thursday, October 13, 2005
Forest Suite, University Union
3:00 - 5:00 p.m.
NOTE ROOM CHANGE!! WINE & CHEESE SOCIAL IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING

MOMENT OF SILENCE

TED HORNBACK Emeritus Professor, English

Madlyne MacDonald Communication Studies Faculty

CONSENT CALENDAR

CONSENT INFORMATION

Search Committee, Dean, College of E&CS
Mary Ann Reihman, NS&M

CONSENT ACTION

Pedagogy Enhancement Awards Subcommittee
Bruce Bikle, H&HS, 2008

Magazine Advisory Group
Manuel Barajas, SS&IS, 2006

Alumni Board
Sylvester Bowie, H&HS, 2006

The Faculty Senate recommends approval of the program proposals outlined in Attachment A.

REGULAR AGENDA

SECOND READING

Background: While discussing graduate course issues in the spring 2004, Academic Affairs decided that they would approve pairing of courses for departments making such requests and that this would help some departments that were experiencing graduate level enrollment problems. Some departments were interested in pairing courses, but didn’t know they could since there was no formal policy. CPC concluded that serious problems might arise without a policy. After researching the issue and conducting an informational hearing with graduate coordinators to receive their perspective and suggestions for developing a policy, CPC concluded that the current practice varied amongst departments and was completely unregulated since there was no policy and that the University needed one in order to insure there were adequate safeguards, standardization, and University oversight. Also, some departments believe that there may be pedagogical reasons for pairing courses that could provide a positive educational experience. Graduate coordinators have had the opportunity to review the initial Paired Courses policy and this latest version that has been placed before the Senate for consideration. NOTE: In response to discussion during the first reading at the September 22nd Senate meeting, the motion has been amended as denoted by strikethroughs and underscores.

California State University is committed to providing quality undergraduate and graduate education. The University understands that graduate education requires more advanced and rigorous instruction. For pedagogical and fiscal reasons, the University permits individual departments on a voluntary basis to develop courses for undergraduate and graduate students with similar subject matter and offer such classes with a single instructor and a common meeting schedule.

This policy will be reviewed by Academic Affairs and the Curriculum Policies Committee after 2 years to assess the policy’s efficacy.

In order to ensure the integrity of the degree major and the individual courses that may be used to meet graduation requirements, approval to offer courses in a paired arrangement will be subject to the following conditions:

1. The advanced undergraduate (i.e., upper division and excluding general education) and graduate courses that are paired must cover similar subject matter. The words used in the titles and descriptions of the two courses must reflect this similarity of subject matter and the same number of units.
    
2. The Class Schedule should make clear, by means of footnotes that both courses of a pair of courses meet at the same time and location, and with the same instructor, but that the two courses have differential requirements reflecting the different course levels.
    
3. Paired offerings must be arranged through the use of regular courses which are published in the Catalog, and the course descriptions should indicate that the courses may be paired.
    
4. Paired courses may only be taken for elective credit and may not replace core graduate classes. Additionally, paired arrangements may not include thesis/culminating experience work, internship credit, or directed reading credit.
    
5. Only upper division courses (normally at the senior level) may be paired with elective graduate courses. Paired courses taken as an undergraduate may not be repeated in the graduate program.
    
6. Neither paired course taken as an undergraduate may be repeated in the graduate program.
    
7. Students shall neither be expected nor permitted to obtain a graduate degree with more than 10 units of paired courses.
    
8. Faculty teaching paired courses will receive weighted teaching unit (WTU) credit based on an agreement between the department and the College Dean.
    
9. Departments and Colleges will approve the pairing of courses for already approved courses through the University process. Only course proposals for new courses must be submitted and approved through the University process (Department, College, the Curriculum Subcommittee, and Academic Affairs).
    
10. The course Proposals to the college must address the following:

1. Justification for the pairing must be attached to each of the proposals at the College level.
    
2. Course descriptions and syllabi must be explicit about how the experience of graduate and undergraduate students is to differ. The syllabi must clearly establish additional requirements for graduate students that might include (but not be limited to) significant research papers, oral presentations of research, and/or demonstration of more sophisticated laboratory or studio skills than those required of students in the paired undergraduate course.

Please see the September 22, 2005 Faculty Senate Agenda Attachment A for the letter of transmittal from Ben Amata, Chair of CPC.

FIRST READING

WHEREAS,	The Faculty Senate adopted a policy(FS-04-67, December 9, 2004) revising the University’s Computer Literacy/Information Competence State and Requirements and reframing it as the Information Competence Graduation Requirement with learning goals that include the development of the following skills: Determine the extent of the information needed.   Access needed information effectively and efficiently.   Evaluate information and its sources critically and use appropriately and effectively.   Use information effectively to accomplish a specific purpose.   Understand the issues associated with legal and ethical access to and use of information.
WHEREAS,	The policy change was enacted without precise implementation language; therefore be it
RESOLVED,	That the Faculty Senate adopts the implementation policy recommended by the General Education/Graduation Requirements Committee which includes the following elements: While programs may certainly use the statement of these competencies to examine and reorganize aspects of their curricula they are not required to do so if in the faculty's judgment all competencies are covered in their present curricula.   Programs are expected to develop during the AY 2005-2006 a statement that addresses each of the five specified components. For each there should be: a brief statement of how the program or discipline uses this competency   identification of course(s) in which each competency is principally introduced along with an example of an assignment for each competency a brief statement on how student demonstration of competencies is measured. A department/program with multiple degree programs may development a single statement for more than one program if the competencies apply similarly to two or more degrees.   These initial statements are due for review no later than April1, 2006. An ad hoc committee established by the GE committee will review the statements and report back suggestions to programs.   Formal submission as well as formal evaluation will be part of normal program review beginning in 2006-2007.

WHEREAS,	Proposition 76, if passed, will make changes to the California Constitution related to state spending limits, school funding requirements (Proposition 98) and the budget process;
WHEREAS,	These changes potentially endanger the ability of California State University, Sacramento, to meet its commitment to our students and the people of California to continue to provide a high quality learning environment on our campus;
WHEREAS,	We support the actions of the Academic Senate of the CSU and our colleagues at other campuses in passing resolutions in opposition to the Proposition; therefore, be it
RESOLVED,	That the Faculty Senate of California State University, Sacramento, opposes passage of Proposition 76 that appears on the ballot of the November 8 special election and that we direct that copies of this resolution be sent to all members of our faculty, to the Associated Students, to the California Faculty Association and to the President of the University.

The entire text of Proposition 76 can be found at http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/bp_nov05/voter_info_pdf/entire76.pdf 

http://www.calstate.edu/AcadSen/records/resolutions/2005-2006/09-05_resolution_packet.pdf  (note: 1.25 MB size)

REPORT

"Guidelines for Hiring New Tenure Track Faculty" - Paul Noble, Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs Planning and Budget

CHAIRS' REPORTS

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. Chair's newsletter: http://www.csus.edu/acse/newsletter.htm
3. Retreat follow-up: charge to Writing and Reading Subcommittee
4. Status on actions taken by the Senate:  http://www.csus.edu/acse/05-06_actions.htm   

5. Upcoming Senate meetings: 

October 27, 2005 - Senate meets November 10, 2005 - Senate meets November 17, 2005 - Senate meets December 1, 2005 - tentative December 8, 2005 - Senate meets December 15, 2005 - tentative