CSU, SACRAMENTO

2010-11 FACULTY SENATE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

3:00-5:00

Sacramento Hall, Room 275

Present: Barrena, Buckley, Hecsh, Krabacher, Peigahi, Piloyan, Pinch, Russell, Sheley, Sheppard, Taylor, VanGaasbeck, Wagner

Guest: Larry Gilbert

MINUTES:

1.  Minutes from March 29, 2011 – amendment: Delete the phrase “…that has no classes held during Thanksgiving week” from the first sentence of item #6. The minutes were approved as amended.

2.  Open Forum:

·  Noel reported that she and Kirt Stout from Environmental Health and Safety will be presenting information to department chairs and how to comply with the new policies and procedures on internships. The information will be available on the Human Resources and Academic Affairs websites.

3.  Chair’s business –

A.  UBAC - Sheppard announced that Scott Farrand’s is willing to be re-appointed to UBAC. Taylor is on UBAC as Sheppard’s designee to the Strategic Planning Council. For the sake of continuity, Sheppard has asked Taylor to continue as his designee on SPC and SPC’s representative to UBAC through August. Taylor has agreed. Barrena recommended David Evans (Geology) and Susan Crawford (Chemistry) be nominated for appointment.

B.  ASI Elections Complaint Committee – Sheppard reiterated his call for members to recruit volunteers, as there none from the committee preference poll.

C.  Meeting schedule for week of 4/11 – Sheppard reminded members that the Outstanding faculty awards ceremony is Tuesday, 4/12. There is no Senate meeting scheduled for Thursday, 4/14, so the EC could meet then. After discussion, the Committee agreed to have an EC meeting on 4/14.

4.  Kbox – The Committee continued its discussion about the Senate motion on Kboxes and reviewed the FAQ’s provided by Larry Gilbert. After discussion, the Committee agreed to place the motion on the 4/7 Senate agenda as a second reading item. Members recommended that Sheppard explain to senators exactly what the motion is calling for and not.

5.  Computer lab usage – the Committee reviewed AITC’s revised motion on computer lab usage. The motion now only involves AIRC 1016. The recommendation is time limited so that data can be collected on what the need is for large computer labs. After discussion, the Committee agreed to place the motion as a continued first reading item on the Senate agenda for 4/7.

6.  Program proposal – Multiple Subject Teaching Credential in the EDS Dual Program (Moderate/Severe Education Specialist and Multiple Subject Credentials): The Committee continued its discussion, having received clarification that the proposal is not for a new program but one that is being “re-packaged”. The Committee agreed to add the matter to the consent calendar on the Senate agenda for 4/7.

7.  Academic calendars – The Committee continued its discussion on the academic calendars. After discussion, the Committee agreed to forward the equal days traditional calendar with a positive recommendation to the Senate for a first reading on 4/21.

8.  ASI resolution regarding advising – the Committee reviewed some preliminary language that might be used to develop motions in response to ASI’s “Resolution to Enhance Academic Advising” that was referred to APC. The Committee discussed past efforts to assess academic advising efforts and the varying levels of success in gathering information. Barrena expressed concern over the presence of the different ongoing efforts: Undergraduate Academic Advising Policy; Graduation Initiative; Closing the Achievement Gap. Would it be wise to have the Senate recommend further advising initiatives? The Committee discussed how the campus needs to know who is getting advising, where, when and how. The Graduation Initiative gives campus the results it needs to achieve – the campus has to figure out how to get there. VanGaasbeck recommended that all new advising initiatives be put on hold pending the Graduation Initiative/Closing the Achievement Gap returning. The Committee agreed. With regard to the recommendation that the program review process be used to determine if programs are complying with the Undergraduate Academic Advising Policy, some members expressed concern over the role of PROC in “policing” this matter. This recommendation should be referred to CPC

The Committee further discussed the compliance with the various policies that are approved by the Senate and subsequently approved by the President. Who oversees compliance? How is it done?

Jeffrey Brodd, Chair of PROC, is presenting a report on the pilot study to the Committee on 4/19. Committee members recommended that he be advised that the discussion will be broader in scope.

9.  CPC referral: moratorium on new programs – Pinch explained that CPC is recommending continuing the moratorium for AY 2011-12. Barrena opposed the continued moratorium, explaining that the moratorium doesn’t encourage the campus to look at real curricular reform and be creative. Areas the campus could look at are upper division units, streamlining GE, minors, etc. Pinch explained that CPC members agreed that maintaining the status quo is appropriate while the Graduation Initiative is being completed. If the moratorium expires, what happens? Proposals will be judged on their merits. Committee members discussed the original reasons given for approving the moratorium: sends the appropriate moral message; programs don’t waste time developing something that won’t be approved; doesn’t pit one program over another. Barrena stated that she would support a motion continuing the moratorium if it contained provisions for CPC to explore other curricular reforms, such as upper division units, streamlining of GE, minors, etc.