2005-2006 FACULTY SENATE
California State University, Sacramento

AGENDA
Thursday, February 2, 2006
Foothill Suite, 3rd Floor, University Union
3:00 - 5:00 p.m.

MOMENT OF SILENCE

RAYMOND CLEMONS Emeritus Faculty, Kinesiology and Health Science & Coach	NORBERT MIETUS Emeritus Faculty, Organizational Behavior & Environment
DEMETRA Nicholas (Oliphant) Mihalakos Counselor, Psychological Services and Employee Assistance Program

CONSENT CALENDAR

CONSENT INFORMATION

Search Committee, Chief Information Officer
Bob Buckley, E&CS
Ronald Coleman, NS&M

CONSENT ACTION

Campus Educational Equity Committee
Rachael Gonzalez, EDUC, 2006

Student Academic Development Committee
Rossitza Wooster, 2006

REGULAR AGENDA

SECOND READING

BACKGROUND: The Executive Committee’s recommended policies address the need for sharing accurate information with the faculty search committees related to our campus commitment to the “active elimination of discrimination and the affirmative recruitment of a diverse, multi-racial community of students, faculty, and staff.” (President Gonzalez, letter accompanying Update to Affirmative Action Plan in Compliance with Executive Order 11246, dated October 31, 2003) The issue involves competing needs for legal compliance, commitment to diversity, and departmental prerogatives re: faculty hiring.  The need for accurate information on this issue has been accentuated by the passage of Proposition 209 in California and the consequent uncertainties about strategies and processes.  Concerned members of the university community express sentiment that recruitment processes have not been effective to date in generating strong and diverse pools of applicants for faculty positions.  The manner in which that information is presented to departmental faculty committees raises sensitive issues of mandated processes and external control.

This issue has been worked on by the Committee on Diversity and Equity (CODE) and the University Appointment, Retention, Tenure and Promotion Committee (UARTP) over the last several years.  In the Spring of 2005, the Executive Committee received a report from UARTP expressing its recommendations (letter from UARTP Chair Dillon dated May 11, 2005 - caution: the file is 39 pages long)  concerning the CODE proposal (Recommendations for Revisions to PM FSA 02-11, section D, dated October 2002, revised 4/19/05) and began a series of discussions and meetings with representatives of several groups and the University Counsel and Vice President for Human Resources.  Over the last two months we have developed the recommendations for consideration by the Senate. The training materials used by Human Resources for search committee members are provided.

The questions and discussion during the first and second readings of resolution FS 05-69 (Proposed Amendment to Section 6.06.D of the UARTP Document) focused on two themes: 1) redundancies in the policy text which occurred as a result of several reformatting efforts (along with some numbering/lettering problems and 2) some of the language seemed to violate the distinction between the educational vs. compliance role of the AA/EOR as articulated in 2A. The Executive Committee has approved a set of changes for continuation of the 2nd reading which we hope address the themes above. The agenda packet includes a side by side comparison of the 1st and 2nd reading language. Here are links to pertinent documents:

• Section 6.06.D of UARTP Policy

• November 17, Faculty Senate Agenda Attachment B

• December 8, Faculty Senate Agenda Attachment

The Faculty Senate recommends amending the University ARTP document, Section 6.06.D as outlined in Attachment A.

The transmittal memo from the Executive Committee to the Senate can be found at Attachment B-1 from the November 17, 2005 Faculty Senate agenda.

Background: On December 8, 2005, FS 05-72, Resolution on New Doctoral Authority for CSUS, was referred back to the Executive Committee to draft a substitute "Resolved" clause for "That the Faculty Senate requests the ad hoc committee develop, in consultation with the department(s) and college(s) housing the program, a leadership structure for the Independent Doctorate, the criteria and process for selection of the leadership position or positions, and the criteria and process for the selection of doctoral faculty, in keeping with the existing policies regarding new programs; and be it further" that reflects what the ad hoc committee on doctorates can properly do under current institutional arrangements of the university. The language denoted by underscores (additions) and strikethroughs (deletions) reflect the Executive Committee's amendment.

WHEREAS,	On September 22, 2005, the Governor of the state of California signed SB 724, which authorizes the CSU to offer a Doctor of Education (Ed.D.) focused on preparing administrative leaders for California public elementary and secondary schools and community colleges and on the knowledge and skills needed by administrators to be effective leaders in California;
WHEREAS,	On September 22, 2005, a news release from Office of the Chancellor regarding the independent doctorate stated, “The new educational leadership doctorate builds upon the CSU’s expertise and program strengths. The CSU historically had its origins in teacher colleges, and the preparation of teachers and education leaders has remained one of its core missions”;
WHEREAS,	California State University, Sacramento has, subject to campus, system-wide and legislative guidelines, well established policies and precedent for faculty-driven curriculum and program development that requires a consultative process;
WHEREAS,	On November 17, 2005, the CSUS Faculty Senate unanimously passed a resolution to authorize the Executive Committee to form an ad hoc committee comprised of faculty with appropriate and demonstrated curriculum policy experience to “1) review existing curricular review processes and develop recommendations for any changes needed, and 2) to develop the necessary areas to be addressed in a doctoral proposal…” be it therefore
RESOLVED,	That the Faculty Senate requests the ad hoc committee develop, in consultation with the department(s) and college(s) housing the program, a broad guidelines for administrative leadership structures for multi-disciplinary or multi-college programs to ensure effective faculty governance for the Independent Doctorate, the criteria and process for selection of the leadership position or positions, and the criteria and process for the selection of doctoral faculty, in keeping with the existing policies regarding new programs; and be it further
RESOLVED,	That the Faculty Senate will support the timeliness needed in moving these policies forward and, with faculty input, amending them as may be necessary for programs of this nature; and be it further
RESOLVED,	That the Faculty Senate, in the spirit of interdisciplinary, collaborative, and innovative curriculum development will support the involvement of all interested faculties on campus in the development of this new program.

FIRST READING

WHEREAS,	The situation known as salary inversion, where faculty with less experience are hired at a greater starting salary than current salary of experienced junior faculty, is clearly unfair and is extremely damaging to morale; and
WHEREAS,	Salary inversion is currently a major issue on the CSUS campus, as exhibited by examples in the College of Social Sciences and Interdisciplinary Studies in which new hires are being offered approximately $7,000 (or 14.6%) more per year than the salaries currently earned by faculty in their fourth year at CSUS. Furthermore, those outrageous salary differentials will grow exponentially over the years, since CSU salary increases are percentage based; and
WHEREAS,	This salary inversion is further compounded by the facts that CSU faculty are paid an average of 19% less than comparable institutions and have received only a 3.5% General Salary Increase compared to a nationwide faculty salary increase of 11.9%; median housing prices in Sacramento have gone up well over 100% over the past five years; and junior faculty who entered in 2003 and 2004 never received a “Salary Step Increase” (SSI), therefore, be it
RESOLVED,	That the Faculty Senate urges that President Gonzalez give top priority to addressing this problem by whatever means are available to him on the campus level during the current academic year; and be it further
RESOLVED,	That the Faculty Senate urges President Alexander Gonzalez to inform the Chancellor’s Office of the difficulties caused by the junior faculty salary inversion problem on the Sacramento State campus and urges the Chancellor’s Office to take steps to address this issue system-wide during the current academic year so that this is not a recurrent problem; and be it further
RESOLVED,	That the Faculty Senate requests President Gonzalez to report to the Senate on the steps taken to resolve the junior faculty salary inversion problem—especially on the campus level but also system wide—by April 1, 2006.

The Faculty Senate recommends implementation of the following requirements regarding student declaration of a major:

• Native freshmen and lower division transfer students are required to declare a major upon completion of 60 units; failure to do this will result in a hold on subsequent registration.
   
• Junior-level transfer students are required to declare a major prior to registration for their second semester; failure to do this will result in a registration hold.

In the implementation of this policy:

• the 60 units of coursework identified above shall include only those courses that carry unit credit toward the degree. (This excludes, therefore, remedial courses and courses taken at non-accredited institutions.)
   
• the Academic Advising Center shall have responsibility for placing and removing the registration holds specified above.
   
• it is recognized that this requirement is for an initial declaration of major only; students still have the option of changing their major after completion of 60 units.

The letter of transmittal from the Academic Policies Committee providing background information can be found at Attachment B.

CSU ACADEMIC SENATE REPORT

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. Status on actions taken by the Senate:  http://www.csus.edu/acse/05-06_actions.htm   
3. Upcoming Senate meetings:

February 2, 2006 - Senate meets February 16, 2006 - Senate meets (3:00-4:00); SPECIAL EVENT: ceremony and reception honoring Faculty Senate Scholarship Award recipients- Hinde Auditorium (4:00-5:00) March 2, 2006 - Senate meets March 23, 2006 - Senate meets March 30, 2006 - Senate meets April 6, 2006 - 1st organizational meeting of the 2006-2007 Senate (3:00 - 3:30); 2005-2006 Senate meets (3:30-5:00)

SPECIAL EVENT: Tuesday, April 18, 2006 - Outstanding Teaching and University Service Awards reception April 20, 2006 - 2nd organizational meeting of the 2006-2007 Senate (3:00 - 3:30); 2005-2006 Senate meets (3:30-5:00) April 27, 2006 - Senate meets May 11, 2006 - Senate meets