2009-2010 FACULTY SENATE
California State University, Sacramento

AGENDA
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Foothill Suite
3:00 - 5:00 p.m.

OPEN FORUM

CONSENT ACTION

FS 10-15/Ex.

COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT – SENATE

Faculty Policies Committee

Shinlung Huang, At-large, 2012

FS 10-20/CPC/Ex.

PROGRAM PROPOSALS

The Faculty Senate recommends approval of the following program proposals, as outlined in Attachment C (24 pages).

A. Multiple Subject Teaching Credential in the EDS Dual Program (Mild/Moderate Education Specialist and Multiple Subject Credentials)

B. School Nurse Credential Program

C. English Major: Areas of Interest

D. Masters Program in Spanish

E. Bachelor of Arts: American Sign Language and Deaf Studies

F. Bachelors Degree in Chemistry (Biochemistry Concentration)

G. Minor in Teacher Education

H. Master of Arts in Theatre

I. Psychology Minor

J. Art History

K. ENVS Undergraduate Major B.S.

L. ENVS Undergraduate Major B.A.

M. ENVS Undergraduate Minor

N. Undergraduate Major, B.A. in Women’s Studies

O. Geographic Information Systems Minor

REGULAR AGENDA

FS 10-16/Flr.

MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 18, 2010

SECOND READING

FS 10-09/Ex.

BY-LAWS: BACKFILL FOR SENATE CHAIR

Proposed Language: (To be added to I.B.1 of the By-Laws)

For the period during which the senator from an electing unit serves as the Chair of the Faculty Senate, the electing unit’s alternate senator, if any, shall serve as the unit’s official voting senator at Faculty Senate meetings. When the alternate is present and voting the Chair shall not vote on any matter. In the absence of the alternate the chair may vote to break a tie.

Reason: The Senator holding the position of Faculty senate chair must, by nature of the position, remain neutral in debates and voting, and cannot therefore be an effective representative of his/her electing unit in these matters. To ensure representation of that unit’s interests in the Faculty Senate, the unit’s alternate senator (if it has one) may serve as the unit’s official voting senator.

If the electing unit has not designated an alternate, then, as is currently the case, the Senate Chair may vote to break a tie.

FS 10-10/Ex.

BY-LAWS: STANDING COMMITTEE CHAIR TERM LIMITS

Proposed Language: (To be added to II.B.2 of the By-Laws)

The Chair of the Standing Committee may be re-elected for up to three (3) consecutive terms.

Reason: This was the sentiment that emerged in the Senate’s earlier discussions of the subject. It eliminates that possibility that Standing Committee Chairs could end up serving longer than senators representing electing units and provides opportunity for new people to move into positions of senate leadership.

Note: If approved, then for current Standing Committee Chairs, the current year (2009-2010) would count as ‘year one’ of their three potential consecutive terms.

FS 10-14/Flr.

LETTERS FROM PROFESSORS SCOTT FARRAND AND SYLVIA NAVARI, RECEIPT AND ENTRY INTO THE FACULTY SENATE MINUTES

The Faculty Senate receives and enters the letters from Professors Scott Farrand (Mathematics) and Sylvia Navari (Social Work) relating to graduate program FTES reductions into the February 18, 2010 Faculty Senate minutes. Professor Navari’s letter can be found at Attachment A. Professor Farrand’s letter can be found at Attachment A-1.

FIRST READING

FS 10-17/Ex.

TASK FORCE ON POSSIBLE REVISIONS TO UNIVERSITY POLICY ON INSTRUCTIONAL PRIORITIES AND RESOURCE ALLOCATIONS, RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF

The Faculty Senate endorses the Task Force on Possible Revisions to University Policy on Instructional Priorities and Resource Allocations as follows:

Task Force on Possible Revisions to University Policy on Instructional Priorities

and Resource Allocation

In line with a recommendation from the Faculty Senate (FS 09-86/Flr.) to and accepted by President Gonzalez, a Task Force shall be established to consider revisions, as appropriate, to the University’s 1991 policy: “Instructional Program Priorities, Guidelines for Academic Planning, Resource Allocation and Enrollment Management.”

Task Force Charge

“Review the 1991 document and make recommendations for revision, as deemed appropriate, for guiding decisions on academic program priorities and distribution of enrollment, including processes by which decisions on program and enrollment distribution are made.”

Task Force Membership

The Task Force will consist of nine members:

· Vice Provost (co-chair)

· Chair of the Faculty Senate (co-chair)

· Designee from Curriculum Policies Committee

· Designee from General Education Policies Committee

· Designee from Graduate Studies Policies Committee

· Representative from Department Chairs (elected by Chairs)

· Representative from AABAC (elected by AABAC members)

· Faculty Member from Library

· Student Representative (appointed by ASI)

Product

The Task Force shall produce a written report and, to the extent appropriate, recommendations. The report shall be delivered to the Provost and made available immediately to the Senate.

Timeline

Task Force should commence activity immediately and should complete its work by March 31.

FS 10-18/APC/Ex.

STUDENT GRADE APPEAL PROCESS, AMENDMENT OF

The Faculty Senate recommends amending the Student Grade Appeal Process as outlined in Attachment B.

A summary of the major/substantive changes to the Student Grade Appeal Process can be found at Attachment B-1.

FS 10-19/Ex.

ACADEMIC VALUES STATEMENT

Statement of short term priorities for Academic Affairs

In times of budgetary difficulty, allocations of resources must be made in such a way so as to preserve the core of the University, so that in better times new resources can be allocated in ways that best serve the mission of the University. These recommendations were synthesized from the survey of values, and are intended as short term recommendations for allocating budget within Academic Affairs. A task force will revisit the 1991 budget policy document in order to make long term recommendations.

Service to Students:

The ability of the University to provide a high quality education to current and future students must not be compromised by reallocation of resources. This includes:

1. Maintaining sufficient course offerings so that currently enrolled students can graduate in a timely fashion, regardless of their majors.

2. Ensuring that sufficient seats are available in courses that satisfy University graduation requirements so that current and future students may progress to degree in a timely fashion.

3. If courses must be cut, focus first on courses that do not directly lie on the path to graduation.

4. Managing enrollment so that the FTES is commensurate with the resources available to support students and educate them.

Faculty Responsibility:

The responsibility of providing instruction to students lies with the faculty. The ability of the faculty to provide high quality instruction must not be compromised by reallocation of resources. This includes:

1. Maintaining the current work load of faculty members, so as to not dilute the ability of faculty to interact with each of their students in a meaningful way.

2. Supporting faculty scholarly activity, as this benefits students directly (through student projects) and indirectly (maintaining faculty currency in their fields).

3. When resources to faculty are reduced, expectations on the faculty and the programs must be revised commensurately.

The University Experience:

The University is a university, not a community college, nor a vocational or technical school. Programs, services and experiences that preserve this distinction are essential. These include:

1. Ensuring diversity in students, staff, faculty and administration.

2. Prioritizing programs and courses that lead to baccalaureate or masters degrees.

3. Prioritizing applied and professional programs where entry level positions require a 4 year or higher level of education.

4. Providing a liberal arts education, and a strong, effective G.E. Program.

5. Ensuring a diversity of course offerings commensurate with our status as a regional, comprehensive university.

Administration Responsibility:

A truly functional system of shared governance will enhance the operations of the University at all levels. Such a system can be sustained in the face of difficulty budgetary times through:

1. Keeping the University budget process open and inclusive, e.g. UBAC, AABAC, periodic briefings to the Senate.

2. Communicating budget related developments quickly and effectively to the campus community, e.g. town halls, e-mail.

3. Informing the campus community as much as possible of the rationale (i.e. perceived costs and benefits) behind resource allocations, especially those that result in major changes.

The Quality Issue:

The University has a set of programs that have developed over time in response to external and internal factors. Although all are worthy parts of the curriculum and the University experience, some prioritization must occur even among worthy programs. To this end a means of evaluating academic quality must be drawn up, in order to guide the resource allocation process.

The survey data can be found at: http://www.csus.edu/acse/Scaled_Values.pdf

SENATE SCHEDULE OF MEETINGS FOR SPRING:

· March 11, 2010

· March 25, 2010

· April 8, 2010

· April 22, 2010

· Tuesday, April 27, 2010 (Outstanding Faculty Awards)

· April 29, 2010

· May 6, 2010

· May 13, 2010

· May 20, 2010