2010-2011
FACULTY SENATE
California State University, Sacramento
AGENDA
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Foothill Suite, Union
3:00 - 5:00 p.m.
MOMENT OF SILENCE
|
RECHELLE ARNOLD Staff, Facilities Services LOUIS BRONSON Emeritus Faculty, Social Work |
GEORGE RICH Emeritus Faculty, Anthropology |
OPEN FORUM
CONSENT INFORMATION
|
FS 10-72/Ex. |
EARLY START PROVOST’S ADVISORY GROUP – ESTABLISHMENT OF |
The Faculty Senate creates an advisory group to the Provost to prepare a proposal for implementation of Executive Order 1048 “Early Start”.
CONSENT ACTION
|
FS 10-72A/Ex. |
COMMITTEE APPOINTMENT - EARLY START PROVOST’S ADVISORY GROUP |
Marcy Merrill, Teacher Education
|
PARLIAMENTARIAN |
Thomas Krabacher, Professor of Geography, shall serve as parliamentarian for the 2010-2011 Faculty Senate.
REGULAR AGENDA
|
FS 10-74/Flr. |
MINUTES OF AUGUST 25, 2010 |
|
NOMINATION OF CHAIR, CURRICULUM POLICIES COMMITTEE |
Background: Article II, Section F of the By-laws of the Faculty Senate state, in part, “ . . . A vacancy in the voting membership of the Executive Committee shall be filled by nomination and election at the first meeting of the Faculty Senate after the vacancy occurs. The nominee elected shall have received more votes than any candidate not elected. . . If the office of Chair of a Standing Committee becomes vacant, the office shall be executed by the Vice Chair of the Standing Committee until the Faculty Senate shall elect a successor as provided in Article II, Sections D.3 and E.3 of these By-laws (http://www.csus.edu/acse/bylaws.htm). The Vice Chair executing the office of Chair under this provision shall not serve as a voting member of the Executive Committee.” David Lang has resigned as Chair of the Curriculum Policies Committee.
Nominations of candidates for Chair of each Standing Committees may be made by a senator from the floor; by the current membership of the Standing Committee; or by a petition signed by ten (10) or more full-time faculty members and filed with the Faculty Senate office before the first meeting of the new Faculty Senate.
The candidates for Chair of each Standing Committees shall submit a one page description of qualifications and intentions to the Faculty Senate office for inclusion with the agenda for the election meeting.
FIRST READING
|
FS 10-76/EX. |
CLASS SIZE, QUALITY AND RESOURCE UTILIZATION TASK FORCE -THANKS AND COMMENDATION |
The Faculty Senate thanks and commends the Class Size, Quality and Resource Utilization Task Force:
Kimo Ah Yun, Center for Teaching and Learning
Jean-Pierre Bayard and Ray Koegel, Academic Technologies and Creative Services
Bob Buckley, Academic Policies Committee
Jesse Cuevas, student representative
Lakshmi Malroutu, Academic Affairs
Dan Melzer, Curriculum Policies Committee (Chair)
Mark Siegler, Faculty Policies
Committee
|
FS 10-77/EX. |
CLASS SIZE, QUALITY AND RESOURCE UTILIZATION TASK FORCE – REPORT: RECEIPT OF |
The Faculty Senate receives the report of the Class Size, Quality and Resource Utilization Task Force, which can be found at Attachment A.
Background documents:
Class Size Research Literature Review
INFORMATION ITEM:
CLASS SIZE, QUALITY AND RESOURCE UTILIZATION REPORT – REVIEW AND FEEDBACK
PERIOD THROUGH OCTOBER 19, 2010
|
FS 10-70/GEP/GRPC/CPC/EX. |
G.E. PILOT |
The Faculty Senate recommends adoption of the General Education Pilot as outlined below:
Sacramento State Studies, GE Pilot, Resolution
The Faculty Senate endorses
the development and implementation of a pilot GE option, called Sacramento
State Studies, beginning in Fall 2011, for up to 20% of first time Freshman
students for no longer than 6 years, pending extension by the Senate.
The Sacramento State
Studies pilot GE option will have the following characteristics:
1. Three “academic learning collaboratives”
(ALCs) consisting of three already approved GE courses redesigned to be
interdisciplinary, team-taught, and multi-modal (lecture, discussion,
e-learning, fieldwork, lab).
2. Each ALC meets current GE requirements in
the Areas and Sub-Areas as currently constructed
3. Composition (A2) and Quantitative Reasoning
(B4) requirements will be met outside of the pilot
4. Students will be recruited via advising during
summer orientation beginning summer 2011
5. Students will be able to drop in/drop out
without academic penalty semester by semester
6. Classrooms will be set aside for Sacramento
State Studies ALCs
7. Transcripts will reflect individual course
grades for each 3-unit GE course area within the ALC
8. The GE/GRPC Committee will have oversight of
the pilot
9. Instructors will receive 6 units toward
Workload for each section of Learning Collaborative (subject to annual review –
see below)
Regular evaluation of
the program will occur throughout the six-year period and will include annual
reports to the Faculty Senate and the Office of Undergraduate Studies, with
evaluative criteria that address:
·
Assessment
of student outcomes in the context of both GE area objectives and Baccalaureate
learning goals
·
Faculty
workload of instructors teaching in the pilot program
·
Resource
allocation
Evaluation and Research Design: All assessment, both direct measures of
learning via classroom assignments, and indirect measures such as surveys of
student satisfaction, confidence, and motivation, etc., will be carefully
connected to the Baccalaureate Learning Goals. The measures will vary across
instructors intentionally; the design allows for maximum flexibility to capture
individual teachers’ funds of knowledge and experience.
Key Research Questions include, but are not limited to the following
1. What evidence can be produced to show that the pilot course(s) have resulted in student learning across time and instructors?
2. What has been changed about the design of the course(s) based on analysis of evidence of student learning?
3. What can be said about the effectiveness of changes made to the course(s) based upon subsequent assessment (i.e., closing the loop)?
4. What are faculty experiences and perspectives with respect to design, pedagogy, and workload?
5. What have been the effects of Sacramento State Studies in terms of resource allocation and the local economies of GE?
Administrative Support:
· Assist with scheduling ALCs in scale up classrooms
· Work with Colleges, Departments, and programs to assist with developing ALCs
· Provide professional development support for developing collaboratives via already existing avenues and external funding (system, national)
Resources:
· There are no resource costs, and intentionally, there should be cost savings
· There is a trade-off potential of preserving major programs by delivering GE more efficiently given the scarcity of resources
Appendix A
Sacramento State
Studies Themes and Interdisciplinary Core Experiences
[1]SSS Proposed Common Interdisciplinary Themes---to which faculty may adjust or repurpose or invent interdisciplinary courses. The themes below will guide faculty as they develop curriculum.
·
Globalization
·
Sustainability
·
Technology,
Society and the Digital Age
·
Social
Change and Social Justice
·
Culture
and Ideas
·
Sacramento
and California in 21st Century
·
Body,
Mind, Well Being
[2]Interdisciplinary Core Experiences (Sacramento State Studies Pilot courses will infuse the following features developmentally and evidence of achievement in these areas will be demonstrated via e-portfolio and evaluated via the use of the VALUE rubrics as revised to reflect Sacramento State Studies and the BLG/GE Outcomes):
·
Leadership
·
Service
in and Engagement with Community
·
Information
Literacy, including Research with Faculty
·
Global
Literacy/Intercultural Perspectives
·
Communities
of Practice/Learning Communities
Appendix B
Faculty Roles: Faculty (as individuals looking for
a “team” or as “teams”) interested in designing (or redesigning)
interdisciplinary pilot courses would do so in the typical fashion with support
and facilitation for faculty development from the Compass Project, the Center
for Teaching and Learning, and Academic Affairs. Pilot FTES and WTUs (6 for each of 3 units
taught of the 9 unit ALC) would flow back to the College proportionally. There should be no net loss since the
students will still be enrolled in courses in colleges typically providing
lower division GE. Any logistical issues
such as course codes etc. would be addressed accordingly.
Faculty Consultation: The
following faculty volunteered/were invited to participate in the discussions
and other activities related to drafting this proposal and are to be commended
for their time, energy and persistence.
GE/CPC Work Group Members:
Ben
Amata, Library, CPC
Stephanie
Biagetti, EDTE, CPC
Dana
Kivel, RPTA, GE
Vivian
Llamas Green, Associate Registrar, CPC
Virginia
Matzek, ENVS, GE
Dan
Melzer, English, WAC, CPC
Joan
Neide, Kineseology, GE
Kat
Pinch, RPTA
Reza
Peigahi, Library, GE
Ann-Louise
Radimsky, ECS, GE Review
Elizabeth
Strasser, Anthropology, GE Assessment, GE Review
Invited Ex Officio
Roberto
Pomo, Theater Arts, Honors Director
Terry
Underwood, EDTE, Assessment Coordinator
Mark
Stoner, COMS, CTL
Additional Contributors and
Feedback:
Aaron
Cohen, History
Amy
Heckathorn, English
Angelica
Tellechea, Student, ASI Representative to GE/GRPC
Anthony
Sheppard, RPTA and Faculty Senate Chair
Bahman
(Buzz) Fozouni, Government
Beth
Merrit Miller, Student Advising
Carolyn
Gibbs, Design
Chris
Castaneda, History
Dennis
Dahlquist, Computer Science
Greg
Shaw, RPTA
Greg
Wheeler, Geology and Associate Dean of General Education
Jesse
Cuevas, ASI Representative to Faculty Senate Executive
John
Forrest, Design
Juanita
Barrena, Biological Sciences
Ken
Sprott, Mechanical Engineering
Noelle
McCurley, Student Advising
Ray
Koegel, COMS
Sheree
Meyer, English
Sue
Holl, Mechanical Engineering
[1] The workgroup identified
the following themes were synthesized from three major sources: a “straw poll” of Sacramento State students,
staff and faculty conducted in March, 2010 (n=100 students, 25 faculty, 18
staff); Portland State FYE and Sophomore Themes, Santa Clara General Education
Themes
[2] Sometimes referred to as High Impact Practices, Excerpt from High-Impact Educational Practices: What They Are, Who Has Access to Them, and Why They Matter, by George D. Kuh (AAC&U, 2008), These have a positive correlation with retention and graduation, for all students-- in particular first generation college students and those from underrepresented and minority communities