Chair MacConnie called the meeting to order at 4:07 p.m. on Tuesday, December 10, 2002, in Nelson Hall East, Room 102 (Goodwin Forum).

Members Present: Adkins, Bicknell, Butler, Cheyne, Coffey, Dalsant, Fonseca, Fulgham, Gill, Goodman, Kinney, Knox, Little, MacConnie, Marshall, Martin, Meiggs, Mortazavi, Moyer, Novotney, Oliver, O'Rourke-Andrews, Paselk, Paynton, Sanford, Shellhase, Snyder, Thobaben, Travis, Varkey, Yarnall

Members Absent: Dunk, Richmond

Proxies: Vrem for Stokes; Little for Derden; Meiggs for Klein; Paselk for Schwab

Guests: Steve Carlson, College of Natural Resource and Sciences; Karen Carlton, College of Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences; Kathleen Doty, Department of English; Ronald Fritzsche, Office of Academic Affairs

1. Approval of Minutes

It was moved and seconded (Cheyne/Meiggs) to approve the submitted minutes for November 5, 2002. MOTION PASSED WITH TWO ABSTENTIONS.

2. Announcements and Communications

Chair MacConnie announced:

A request for project proposals for the 2002-2003 academic year that will advance the CSU's principal continuing education objectives has been received. Proposals are due March 28, 2003. Senators may contact Greta for additional information.

President Richmond is in Long Beach today for an executive committee meeting; the budget probably will be one of the discussion items.

William Daniels, Department of Government and Politics, and Richard Stepp, Department of Physics, are the new members of the Intercollegiate Athletics Advisory Committee.

Proposals related to the Student Enrollment Services Center will be discussed at an open meeting Thursday, December 12, 3 p.m., University Center Banquet Room.

Plans for President Richmond's inauguration are underway. It is intended to be an inclusive event for all members of the campus and neighboring community. Michael Slinker will be coordinating efforts to determine interest level so that an adequate location can be identified and necessary reservations made.

Senate membership changes for Spring 2003 include: Simon Green will be serving as Bernadette Cheyne's proxy; Brian Post will be serving as Eugene Novotney's proxy; and Kristine Nelson will be serving as the Staff Council representative.

On November 19 the Senate Executive Committee met with the University Executive Committee to discuss issues of common interest, issues of shared governance, issues before the senate, etc. It was a good beginning to opening dialogue between the two committees. The meeting ended with a decision to have a retreat on January 14 to discuss agenda items for spring term.

3. Committee and State Senate Reports

Statewide Senate - Senator Snyder announced that discussion at the plenary session included the increase of units from 56 to 60 needed for transfer students. This probably will be adopted in March. A change in the bylaws restricting executive terms to two years in succession was adopted.

Senator Thobaben announced that the Faculty Affairs Committee worked with the Fiscal Committee to draft a resolution that will be asking this senate to review and approve a resolution calling for the reconsideration of the trustees' proposed budget. Included in the packet is a list of CSU executive salaries.

Associated Students - Students are highly disturbed by the possible 10 percent increase in tuition that will be discussed at the December 16 meeting of the Board of Trustees. The lack of time to educate the student population about this issue and the fact that this meeting is scheduled during finals week also are disturbing. Associated Students is looking for support of the faculty on this matter. A student delegation will be going by bus to attend this meeting, and CSSA will be coordinating the effort to bus students from every campus to Long Beach. A planning rally will be held outside the complex and speakers are on the agenda to address the Board. It is important that a response be made now indicating that this is an unacceptable plan: it is not a dependable source of revenue and such a move will deny access to students and will not improve the quality of education. The 10 percent increase is to be effective Spring 2003 so that students who have paid their tuition will be receiving another bill. Anyone willing to support the students in this endeavor is invited to contact Associated Students. Students have compiled a list of priorities to respond to this issue, and interested parties may contact the Associated Students Office. The increase in student fees is part of a larger issue; CPEC is developing a proposal on student fees and will present it to the legislature. This information may be found on CPEC's web site.

Student Affairs - Monday is the annual breakfast and dinner for students, and volunteers are needed to help serve the students. The search for the Athletic Director is scheduled to begin after the first of the year.

Development & Administrative Services - The search for the University Budget Director is underway; one finalist was on campus yesterday, and two more finalists will be campus on December 18 and 19. The finalists are scheduled to meet with the Senate Executive Committee and open forums are scheduled. Please forward any comments to Interim Vice President Coffey or any member of the committee.

Faculty Affairs - The Committee continues its work on the RTP process and hopes to have an initial draft of Appendix J ready for review during next term.

Senate Finance - The Committee has reviewed a draft regarding a response to the budget criteria.

Educational Policies - The Committee has two items on today's agenda.

OAA - Richard Vrem, Dean for Undergraduate Studies, announced that faculty who rent a cap and gown for the President's inauguration, may keep those items through commencement.

UCC - Between 25 and 30 courses have been approved for DCG certification. The final deadline for having a course qualify for the fall schedule is January 24.

CFA - Students were advised to seek the support of the unions on the issue of access. CFA had its board meeting and Council of President's meeting last weekend and most of the time was devoted to this issue. CFA is concerned about the entire question of access and has a long-standing position of being opposed to any fee increases. Members of CFA also are aware that this is a dangerous and difficult time in the CSU because of this particular budget crisis. CFA has committed itself to working on the Accessibility Project, which consists of interns in CFA chapter offices assigned to work with students. It is important that education not suffer unnecessarily owing to any budgetary decisions. Studies have shown that when fees were raised in the 1990's, the effect was a decrease in the number of attending students. The Union will have representatives at the meeting of the Board of Trustees to speak on behalf of students and to support no increase in fees. This issue must be taken seriously by all; it is a local issue. Surprise also was expressed at the attempt by the College of Natural Resources & Sciences to introduce a fee increase to students taking courses in the college. Instituting differential fees is not a good idea; it is divisive and harmful. This is a proposal that not only affects the College of Natural Resources & Sciences, but affects Cal Poly Humboldt.

George Diehr was elected as the CalPERS representative.

General Faculty President - Appreciation was expressed to Robin Meiggs, Treasurer of the CFA, for arranging the December 10 social event sponsored by the CFA, the General Faculty Association and the Academic Senate. The end of the year social is scheduled for Monday, May 12. Volunteers are needed to serve on the Nominating Committee; anyone interested should contact General Faculty President Fulgham.

The bylaws and constitution committee continues its work; a report should be available during spring term.

4. Election of Secretary of the Senate and Chair of the Educational Policies Committee

Owing to Senator Cheyne's acceptance as Interim Associate Dean for the College of Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences for Spring 2003, an election is required to fill the position of Secretary of the Senate and Chair of the Educational Policies Committee.

It was moved and seconded (Thobaben/Dalsant) to nominate Jacob Varkey as Secretary of the Senate and Chair of the Educational Policies Committee for Spring 2003 term.

It was moved and seconded (Travis/Goodman) to close nominations. Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED.

Voting on the nomination of Jacob Varkey occurred and MOTION PASSED WITH ONE ABSTENTION.

Chair MacConnie expressed her appreciation to Senator Cheyne for her hard work on the Educational Policies Committee this year.

5. Resolution on the Proposed Budget of the Board of Trustees (#08-02/03-EX)

Chair MacConnie provided background on this resolution stating that historically items contained in the partnership agreement are more likely to be funded than those not included. At the October 31 Board of Trustees' meeting, the CFA offered an amendment to the budget to move the 1 percent faculty compensation below the line, and to move the 3 percent compensation above the line to include it in the partnership agreement. The amendment was defeated and the Board of Trustees passed the proposed budget as outlined in the attachment to this resolution. The CSU Academic Senate discussed the proposed budget and concluded that it failed to meet budget priorities identified in prior resolutions passed by the statewide senate. The concern of the statewide senate was that in not addressing salary issues and the first year cost of the ACR-73, the potential for funding would be decreased and faculty recruitment and retention would be compromised. The statewide senate passed its resolution asking the Board of Trustees to reconsider the proposed budget. The resolution from Humboldt's Senate Executive Committee is designed to support the request of the statewide senate; there are some campuses who have supported this resolution already and many other campuses who will be doing so in the next few weeks.

It was moved and seconded (Cheyne /Little) to place the resolution on the floor.

WHEREAS, The CSU Academic Senate passed a resolution calling on the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees to reconsider the proposed 2003-2004 budget to be "consistent with the priorities clearly enunciated by the Chancellor, the Senate, and other CSU faculty representatives"; and

WHEREAS, The CSU Academic Senate resolution clearly articulates the importance of including specific aspects of the budget within the partnership portion of the budget to increase the likelihood of funding; therefore, be it

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Cal Poly Humboldt endorse the resolution "Call for Reconsideration of Trustees' Proposed Budget" passed by the CSU Academic Senate on November 8, 2002; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Cal Poly Humboldt convey this endorsement to the CSU Chancellor, the Board of Trustees and other CSU campus senates.

Discussion comments included:

The budget affects everyone, and there was general agreement that the proposed budget was not reflecting priorities established by the Board of Trustees over the past several years, including not closing the CPEC gap for faculty and not keeping the commitment made to enforce ACR-73, which is important for all of California. This resolution holds the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees to their own priorities.

Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

It was moved and seconded (Thobaben/Little) to make this an emergency item for immediate transmittal to the President.

Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

6. Resolution Regarding Double Counting of Institutions Courses for General Education Area D (#09-02/03-EP)

It was moved and seconded (Cheyne/Little) to place the resolution on the floor.

WHEREAS, In academic year 1999-2000 a General Education Structure Review Subcommittee was formed by the University Curriculum Committee at Cal Poly Humboldt with the charge of reviewing and improving the General Education Program at Cal Poly Humboldt; and

WHEREAS, The activities of the General Education Structure Review Subcommittee culminated in a recommendation that Cal Poly Humboldt students be allowed to double count one Institutions course in satisfying the General Education Area D requirements; and

WHEREAS, Review of reports, memoranda, and the notes from an open campus meeting of 25 January 2001 regarding the double counting of an Institutions course in satisfying General Education Area D requirements reveals significant differences of perspective on a number of substantive issues including:

educational goals and curricular integrity,

comparative course content of Institutions versus Area D courses,

equitable distribution of General Education requirements,

student flexibility, especially as it relates to a 120 unit degree minimum,

relevancy of General Education practices at other CSU institutions in relationship to those at Cal Poly Humboldt, and

the need for a more holistic approach that encompasses the overall matrix of General Education rather than focusing upon one aspect of its structure;

and

WHEREAS, A subcommittee of the University Curriculum Committee is reviewing the nature of General Education as a whole at Cal Poly Humboldt which may yield options or recommendations based upon a broader view of this aspect of the University's curriculum; therefore, be it

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Cal Poly Humboldt commend the members of the General Education Structure Review Subcommittee for their commitment of time and expertise in reviewing and recommending upon this important curricular matter; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Cal Poly Humboldt recommend that any action relative to specific aspects of this University's current General Education and Institutions structures be deferred until such time as decisions can be made in reference to its broader context; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Cal Poly Humboldt recommend that the educational goals and curricular integrity in meeting those goals as defined by the faculty of Cal Poly Humboldt remain the primary criteria in defining and assessing its General Education structure; and be it further

RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Cal Poly Humboldt affirm the primacy of faculty who possess expertise in the General Education and Institutions subject areas in determining the curricular integrity of these courses.

Senator Cheyne provided background on the resolution, stating that the impetus to form the General Education Structure Review Subcommittee came from the concern regarding the minimum 120 units required for graduation and the concern raised by many high-unit majors that the integrity of their academic program may be compromised. This concern does not appear to be of a critical nature since the program review process allows high unit majors the opportunity to offer a rationale for the number of units in their programs. The concern of the members of the Educational Policies Committee is that pulling out sections of the structure, rather than looking at it holistically, is not the best method of approaching general education and the basic subjects as a whole. Given that there is not a compelling reason at this time regarding the 120 unit minimum, and given that the UCC does have a subcommittee in place looking at the general education structure, it seemed best to defer any action on any aspect of general education until a recommendation from such subcommittee is received or, in lieu of that, until some recommendation has been received that has looked at the structure in its entirety.

Discussion comments include:

The lack of double counting has an impact on student recruitment. This is not the best way to use our general education, and the double counting issue should be resolved before looking at general education. This would allow decisions to be made regarding general education without the additional units. General education is met in many courses if taught in any reasonable fashion.

One campus double counts both courses and approximately 50 percent of the CSU campuses double count one course. There was no evidence that in making this recommendation, the committee had looked at the general education and basic subjects structures on those campuses; without reviewing double counting in relationship to the overall structure of general education, an important piece of information is missing.

Regarding the controversy as to whether the Institutions courses adequately represent the content covered in Area D, again no evidence was found that the committee had reviewed any course syllabi of any of the Area D or Institutions courses in order to more specifically identify to what extent the curriculum of these courses may or may not address the requirements. This also is an important aspect of making an informed decision.

Perhaps this issue has not been discussed to the extent to which it should be discussed in coming to a decision. The expanding curriculum in the sciences requires that if completion of 120 units is a requirement for graduation and if some of the science programs want the provision of increasing the number of units, then a thorough review is needed to determine if the courses can be double counted or not. Perhaps the Educational Policies Committee should look at this issue again and return to the senate with a resolution.

Since CR offers Institutions requirements that meet Area D, why not, especially during the summer, advise students to attend CR to meet two requirements as opposed to taking them here at Humboldt which only meets one requirement.

Concern was expressed regarding the differential treatment of students, and it is not clear how accepting double counting now would have any impact on decisions made regarding the overall structure of general education later. Concern was expressed that a year from now a new group of transfer students will be allowed to double count courses that Humboldt students will not be allowed to double count.

During the investigation of issues surrounding this topic, no evidence was found that the concerns expressed by faculty teaching the courses were acknowledged in any substantive way so that judgments about content were being made without looking at the content and the issues raised by faculty. [The final resolved clause does not follow on a whereas clause and this is problematic; it takes it out of the general faculty's purview and says this group of faculty should be given special consideration in terms of general education.] [If the final resolved clause means that faculty should defer to the judgments of experts in the area once faculty have decided on the general structure of general education, that may be agreeable.]

Executive Order 405 from the Chancellor's Office dictates the content of a course; the dictates of this course do not meet Area D General Education requirements. This resolution addresses the issue from a curricular standpoint. No one disagrees with the statement that faculty exercise complete control over curriculum, and faculty need to make curricular decisions. There does not seem to be any curricular reason for double counting.

It is clear that these classes do not meet the requirements for GE in Area D; perhaps the requirements in Area D need to be changed.

Treating transfer students differently than native students is an equity and fairness issue. Regarding the 120 units, this is the minimum number of units that can be required; it is possible for programs to exceed 120 units and several of Humboldt's programs do exceed this number. Executive Order 595 has specific language that allows up to two of the Institutions courses to double count for general education.

Approving this resolution means that the double counting issue will be incorporated into the overall GE review and recommendation; if the resolution is not approved, then this item will be returned to the Educational Policies Committee to write a resolution.

The UCC subcommittee is addressing the entire general education program; however, the members also are waiting for the Strategic Plan discussions so that general education discussions may occur at the same time.

This issue also should be discussed with the students so that their view is considered.

Perhaps courses could be developed that meet both the Institutions requirement criteria and the Area D requirement.

7. TIME CERTAIN 5 P.M.

Discussion Item: Pilot Program for High School Courses for Humboldt Credit

The documents related to this issue include the report from the Educational Policies Committee to the Academic Senate, Executive Order 314 and 397 (in part) and Executive Order 461, Memorandum from the ad hoc committee to the Joint Council of Deans and Faculty Leaders dated May 2, 2000, and related Memoranda of Understanding.

Senator Cheyne provided background to the discussion item stating that the initial work on this issue was started prior to her term as chair of the Educational Policies Committee. Given that additional experience with this program has occurred since the report from the Educational Policies Committee was prepared last year and that there are departments and individuals with a certain degree of investment in the program, the Committee believed it would be valuable to get input from senators and other knowledgeable individuals before a resolution is drafted and presented to the senate.

Chair MacConnie, past chair of the Educational Policies Committee, stated that the original memorandum establishing the pilot program contains a provision that after one year the Educational Policies Committee would review the pilot program. This review was undertaken last year by the Educational Policies Committee who talked with the high school liaisons for the courses. The Committee was working on data from one year. The liaisons were given release time to oversee the courses. The Committee considered the rationale for reviewing a single year's data, what issues needed to be addressed, and whether the pilot program should be continued. Most of the students who took the course passed it. Issues of concern to the Committee included curricular justification and the high schools did not request this service; Humboldt proposed it. There was concern regarding quality control and curricular oversight. Other concerns included the possibility of taking resources from Humboldt students in order to provide for the high school students, possible contractual implications, and what to do about low enrollment classes. The final recommendation was not to continue this program; however, this did not mean that the concept was not a good idea. The concerns centered around implementation of the program, including such issues as could those same services be provided by having students come to the Humboldt campus and did the program meet the requirements of Executive Order 461.

Discussion comments included:

Kathleen Doty, Chair of the English Department, provided an update on the program by addressing several of the arguments against the pilot programs as outlined in the report from the Educational Policies Committee to the Academic Senate:

(1) There is a lot of interaction between the liaison and the instructor at Eureka High School. An evaluation is conducted each year and there is a new MOU signed this year.

(2) There is agreement that AP courses, where available, are the appropriate courses for high school students, and the AP partnership is designed to verify that those students who pass the literature-based AP test also possess the composition skills necessary to perform at the college level.

(3) There is increased contact between the liaison instructor and the high school students -- the students visit campus, receive identification cards, have a Blackboard training session, etc.

(4) Low enrollment has not been an issue for English 100; in Spring 2001, there were 18 students, in Spring 2002, 25 students and in Fall 2002, 47 students.

(5) Many of the co-registration problems have been resolved so that all students are enrolled by census.

Professor Doty indicated that there are additional benefits to offering the program stating that in the three years the program has been offered, eight of the ninety participating students are enrolled at Humboldt; many of the students enrolled in the AP courses tend to enroll at the UC campuses or private universities. Other benefits include curricular alignment; professional development; higher caliber of writing; improved community relationships through concurrent enrollment, access to Humboldt facilities, computer labs, library, Blackboard, etc. The portfolio system is an established complete system of proficiency; high school students go through the same process as the Humboldt students.

The social relations value of this partnership should be considered. Historically there has been some antagonism between public schools and the University; this program is breaking down some of the earlier conflicts so that positive connections between the faculty at Humboldt and the high school have improved greatly. This is a way of moving the campus out to places that make Humboldt programs acceptable and accessible, and the positive comments from students may help recruitment on this campus.

8. TIME CERTAIN 5:25 P.M.

Approval of Fall Graduation List

It was moved and seconded (Yarnall/Cheyne) that the Academic Senate of Cal Poly Humboldt accept the final graduation list for Fall 2002 and recommend the graduation of all persons whose names are on that list, subject to the provision that any student whose name is on the list and who has not fulfilled the requirements for graduation, will have her/his name removed from the list, and that student will not be graduated.

Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

It was moved and seconded (Yarnall/Bicknell) to make this an emergency item for immediate transmittal to the President.

Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

7. Discussion Item: Pilot Program for High School Courses for Humboldt Credit (Continued)

Discussion comments continued:

The junior colleges are beginning to accept high school courses for academic credit and clarification on this entire process is needed. It may be better if this program offered a section of English 100 at the high school and this is the course students signed up for; however, this is not happening. The students are signing up for a high school English AP course, then they will be enrolled concurrently in an English 100 course. If they pass the AP course, then they are given credit for an English 100 class.

Establishing equivalencies involves a student taking a course at a community college. Then the equivalency is established at the department level and continues through the evaluation process. There is no indication on the transcript that the student did not take the course at the community college, but took it at Humboldt; transcript integrity requires some indication of where the student's courses were taken. [Board of Trustee changes in Title 5 regulations under articulation of high school courses include adoption of a restricted model so that such courses do not count toward GE or the 56 units required for transfer. However, such regulations do say that articulated high school courses used to partially satisfy certificate or major requirements shall be clearly noted as such on the student's academic record.] [If the course offered were an Humboldt course, then that would be a satisfactory option.]

Executive Order 461, which quotes Title 5, states that this executive order is to be used in conjunction with the routine enrollment of high school students in regularly offered courses whether in special extension or state supported terms. This order clearly prohibits a regular offering of these courses. Thus, such courses appear to violate both EO 461 and Title 5.

The AP English course is accepted at Cal Poly Humboldt and in order to take an AP course, a student must have a certain GPA. There is no requirement that high school students taking courses at Cal Poly Humboldt be identified as gifted.

Adding a composition component that is reviewed by college faculty and considered to be college level educational material coupled with a literature requirement that is reviewed by college faculty and deemed to be college level material resolves much of the conflict for high schools debating whether this AP line of English education is best for students. Any efforts made to extend the AP units will help ensure that the education of students will progress faster, and such students will be able to better use any available legislative aid. This is an excellent way to get students into and through higher education.

Anecdotal information indicates that the AP English courses ought to qualify for composition credit. Although such a program is good for the betterment of the relationship between the community and the campus, it should not be costly in terms of Humboldt's resources. Additional ways to accommodate high school students need to be explored. [This program actually saves Humboldt money because while there are two sections of the English 100, Humboldt is only paying for one section.] [Not every university accepts AP credits but they would accept transfer credits from Humboldt for a first-year composition course.]

There was general agreement that this discussion item be brought back to the senate at a later date since the discussion so far has focused primarily on the AP course, and consideration of the larger picture is needed.

6. Resolution Regarding Double Counting of Institutions Courses for General Education Area D (#09-02/03-EP) [Continued]

Discussion continued with the following comment:

Part of the tension surrounding this discussion arises from the conflict between the guidelines for Area D general education courses and the Executive Order establishing the Institutions equirements. It would be a good idea to get the involved parties (the Educational Policies Committee, the Curriculum Committee and the subcommittee of the UCC and faculty involved in the courses) together to discuss this issue and determine if there is a way to meld these courses together in such a way so as to maintain the academic integrity or discover that such a fusion is not possible.

It was moved and seconded (Thobaben/Fulgham) to postpone indefinitely discussion of the issue. By decision of Chair MacConnie, the item will be postponed until the suggested constituencies are convened and a recommendation is developed.

Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED WITH ONE NO VOTE AND TWO ABSTENTIONS.

It was moved and seconded (Fulgham/Travis) to adjourn the meeting.

Meeting adjourned 5:50 p.m.