HUMBOLDT STATE UNIVERSITY
Academic Senate Minutes
December 12, 2000
Chair Cheyne called the meeting to order at 4:07 p.m. on Tuesday, December 12, 2000, in Nelson Hall East, Room 102 (Goodwin Forum)
Members Present: Bicknell, Bockover, Burroughs, Cheyne, Dixon, Fulgham, Giovannetti, Goodman, Kenyon, Knox, Larson, Little, MacConnie, Martin, Mayer, McCrone, McFarland, Novotney, Ogden-Herrera, Pecot, Stokes, Thobaben, Thompson, Travis, Wang, Wilson, Yarnall
Members Absent: Christensen, Kelvin, Meiggs, Smith
Proxies: Reiss for Varkey; Greta for Sheppard
Guests: Steven Butler, Student Affairs; Gail Fults, School of Business and Economics; Richard Vrem, Undergraduate Studies
It was moved and seconded (Fulgham/Snyder) to approve the submitted minutes of November 07, 2000. Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED with one abstention.
2. Announcements and Communications
Chair Cheyne announced that the copy of the draft academic calendar contained in the senate packet is the calendar that was discussed at the last senate meeting, not the approved calendar for 2001-2002. A copy of the approved calendar for 2001-2002 was distributed through campus mail.
A committee will be formed to discuss the calendar issue for 2002-2003 and beyond. The senate should receive a recommendation during spring term.
Also included in the packet is a copy of a letter from President McCrone, dated November 7, which refers to three resolutions passed by the senate at its October 10 meeting. The resolution on campus policy on workplace violence and the resolution on intellectual properties were not approved. However, President McCrone asked Chief Robert Foster to convene the Crisis Consultation Team to review both the Zero Tolerance Policy and the Workplace Violence Prevention Program and incorporate in a new draft policy (1) language concerning false and malicious complaints of violations; (2) provision of sanctions for substantiated complaints; and (3) acknowledgement of due process rights regarding reprimands and disciplinary action. President McCrone asked Dean Donna Schafer to convene the Advisory Board for Research and Creative Projects to review the intellectual property policy for consistency with Article 39 of the CBA. Both Chief Foster and Dean Schafer were asked to provide recommendations by March 1, 2001. The resolution on senate membership was approved.
A copy of the 1999-2000 Annual Partnership Report from the CSU System to the state government also is included in the packet. This Report contains information on the 18 indicators that constitute the partnership agreement.
Chair Cheyne reported on the November 30 senate chairs' meeting:
The major issues of concern named by the various campus chairs included shared governance, CMS (especially for the smaller campuses) and the FMI Program, described as a disaster on all campuses.
[Senator Kenyon reported that Humboldt State University is scheduled to receive the CMS software next fall. Mr. Stephen Heck has been hired as Humboldt's CMS Project Director, and he will use the software to begin the conversion process of our current human resource and financial accounting systems to the PeopleSoft system. Banner (Humboldt's student information systems) probably will be the biggest issue since it is not known yet whether Banner will be preserved or disbanded.]
The chairs agreed to create a "Case Book" which identifies the best and the worst practices regarding shared governance since it appears to be the definition and not the principle of shared governance that is the issue.
Permission has been obtained from David Spence to draft an additional accountability measure which involves the administration on each campus reporting on their success in engaging in shared governance as defined by HEERA.
The senate chairs are drafting a resolution to the Statewide Academic Senate expressing concern about the cost of CMS and asking that a detailed report of the financial impact to each CSU campus be prepared.
Statewide Senate Chair Jackie Kegley reported that a workload report is being prepared which will review how faculty duties have changed over the past ten years and what responsibilities the job now includes.
Concern was expressed regarding the timing of the proposed survey of department chair responsibilities, etc., described by David Spence, and it was recommended by the senate chairs that such a survey be postponed until after ratification of the new contract.
Lower division major articulation is still a significant issue. The Governor vetoed a bill this year that would have mandated lower division articulation because of the progress being made by the CSU. The administration wants from 3 to 5 lower division major courses in each discipline that will transfer and would like 75 to 80 percent compliance systemwide.
[No discussion occurred regarding the CSU majors that do not have lower division courses, nor was CAN (California Articulation Numbering) system mentioned. CAN has been in operation for years which provides equivalencies between CSU, UC and junior colleges. It appears as though the CAN system is not adequate to meet the articulation needs of the CSU.]
3. Committee and State Senate Reports
UCC - The Committee is actively working on three items. (1) The Liberal Studies Elementary Education (LSEE) oversight details are now available for review and recommendation. The subcommittee is reviewing the oversight proposal from the LSEE Executive Committee and the responses from CNRS and CAHSS. The subcommittee's charge is to structure the problem for the UCC and is hoping for a February resolution. (2) The GE Structure Review Subcommittee has proposed double-counting one of the institutions courses. The UCC has scheduled a campus-wide meeting in spring to get input from a wide constituency across campus. This proposal has ramifications not only for History and Government & Politics, but also for other Area D departments. The UCC hopes to make a recommendation in February. (3) The UCC/Senate Joint Subcommittee currently is reviewing campus policy for terminating programs (both voluntary and involuntary). The committee is using the Chancellor's Office policy from 1979 and hopes to construct local procedures and have a resolution during spring term.
Student Affairs - The Committee is completing its review of the athletics grants in aid policies and procedures.
Statewide Senate - Senator Snyder announced that Academic Affairs is reviewing the implementation of a Memorandum of Understanding between the CSU and the community college system which will be in effect from May 2000 through June 2003. There was no faculty input and some of the MOU's requirements that are being evaluated include transfer degrees which would be agreed on by the community colleges and participating CSU campuses. Preliminary procedures for this need to be in place by next fall. Lower division requirements for GE and lower division requirements for a major, and any appropriate lower division electives, are being reviewed. The idea is that such requirements should be grouped in transfer degree packages. Local campuses and the CSU would agree that if a student successfully completes the package courses, the student will be admitted to the CSU campus and those package courses will count toward the student's general education and lower division major requirements. The importance of negotiating such transfer packages individually rather than statewide was noted.
Senator Thobaben stated that the Annual Partnership Report contained in the packet was sent to the governor in response to the partnership between the chancellor and the governor regarding funding. There are 18 key performance areas divided into 5 major sections. Faculty Affairs was most interested in number 17, closing the faculty salary gap. On page 28, the CSU administration claims that the gap has now been closed to 2.9 percent.
Educational Policies Committee - The Committee has completed the review of the continuous enrollment policy for graduate students; is reviewing the service learning course policy; and is reviewing a procedure for proposing new degree programs.
Office of Academic Affairs - Vice President Stokes announced that budget principles are still being developed and reviewed, and a small group will be working on the issue of summer and summer session, including the budget. Currently the summer budget is being handled separately; eventually it may be combined with the academic year budget.
Associated Students - The governor's task force on sustainability has recognized Humboldt State University and its students for green building designs, and Humboldt students will be discussing many of the issues connected to such designs in Sacramento. The chief architect for the CSU system will be visiting Humboldt to discuss green building designs. The BSS Building location was discussed at Associated Students' December 11 meeting. City Council members and the chair of the Union Street Association attended the meeting, which took on a rather contentious tone. As a result, the students felt intimidated and caught in the middle. Ken Combs, Director of Physical Services, requested that the students draft an opinion on the BSS Building which resulted in a strong response from the City of Arcata. As a result, that resolution was tabled and more forums will be held. The fiscal, governmental and elections codes, etc., are being revised, particularly after passage of the Romero Act, which targets student governments and CSSA. The all-night study lounge has been changed to a late-night study lounge and is scheduled to run Sunday through Wednesday, from 5 p.m. to 2 a.m.
Academic Affairs - The Committee is continuing to work on the procedures for filing complaints of misconduct or unlawful discrimination and hopes to have it to the Senate Executive Committee early next term. It also hopes to complete a review of the counselor's personnel document this term and bring forward a recommendation soon.
General Faculty - General Faculty President Larson distributed a copy of the December 7 memo regarding the general faculty election to be held during spring term. Senators were asked to encourage their colleagues to consider running for a position.
Senate Finance - At the URPBC meeting it was agreed to not allocate the $1.1 million. The OAA Budget Committee continues to work on the budget principles. The enrollment target for next year has been lowered and any budget ramifications have not been discussed yet. The Schedule 25 Committee has been meeting and it looks as though Schedule 25 will continue to be used for the foreseeable future. There is not enough information on PeopleSoft yet to eliminate Schedule 25, and there are some proponents of Schedule 25 who believe they can improve its efficiency.
CFA - The factfinding report has been received. There is a blackout period of 15 days from the time it was received, but it is not clear yet how the 15 days will be counted. Other things may preclude the publication of the fact finder's report, particularly if the report is the basis for continuing negotiation of the reopeners. In addition, since the new contract will be under negotiation soon, strategies for the openers for the new contract were discussed. The CSU has asked to be allowed to delay their sunshine proposals, the first set of contract language changes made by each side, until March. Most likely, substantive negotiations will begin early in March after the Board of Directors meeting.
Regarding salary, the CSU has claimed that there is no salary gap. CPEC (California Post-Secondary Education Commission) constructed an index to measure CSU faculty salaries against comparable institutions across the United States. CPEC has not suggested that the gap has closed appreciably. Evidence shows that while there was a slight closing of the gap a few years ago, this was due more to the miscalculation by CPEC of what was occurring in the comparable institutions and their projected growth rate than it was to any action taken by the CSU. It was a coincidence that the CPEC lag appeared to have closed at all. It is believed that the salary gap is about the same as it has been for the past five years.
Information is being gathered from each campus about the negotiation process on the openers. CFA Chapter President Travis expressed hope that faculty on Humboldt's campus will participate in talking about the fundamental issues of a relatively rural campus. A comprehensive set of principles will be developed for negotiation. The next contract is regarded as the most important contract to date. It is the first time that additional resources are available to assist with the negotiation process and this allows for more research and professional help. It is expected that faculty will be confronting a relatively hostile CSU and the hope is for this to be a unified campaign for members and fair share payers alike.
4. Approval of Fall Graduation List
It was moved and seconded (Yarnall/Little) that the Academic Senate of Humboldt State University accept the graduation list of Fall 2000 and recommend the graduation of all persons whose names appear on that list subject to the provision that any student whose name is on that list and who has not fulfilled the requirements of graduation, will have his/her name removed from the list and that student will not be graduated.
Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED.
It was moved and seconded (Yarnall/Larson) to make this an emergency item for immediate transmittal to the President. Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED.
5. FMI Appeals Panel Selection
FMI policy calls for the selection of a five-member panel at the last senate meeting in the fall term. Names were submitted by the respective areas.
The five members selected include: Bill Daniel
Bud Burke
Martha Haynes
Bob Snyde
Mary Kay
The two alternates include: Joe Leeper
Al Figone
6. Resolution Regarding Student Intellectual Property Rights (#06-00/01-EX)
It was moved and seconded (Bicknell/Ogden-Herrera) to place the resolution on the floor.
WHEREAS, On November 6, 2000, the Associated Students of Humboldt State University passed a resolution, appended to this document, titled Student Intellectual Property Rights, requesting that Humboldt State University policies be rewritten to address student concerns regarding their intellectual property rights; and
WHEREAS, The Academic Senate of Humboldt State University affirms that policies regarding intellectual property rights must fairly address and protect the interests of all concerned parties, and especially those whose creativity, initiative and effort result in the intellectual properties at issue; therefore, be it
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Humboldt State University endorse the appended November 6, 2000 Associated Student resolution titled Student Intellectual Property Rights; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of Humboldt State University distribute copies of this resolution and its attachment to the Humboldt State University Foundation Board of Directors; Shaun Lumachi, Chair, California State Student Association; Charles Reed, Chancellor, California State University; and Laurence K. Gould, Jr., Chair, CSU Board of Trustees.
The resolution comes from the Senate Executive Committee and represents an endorsement of the Associate Student resolution regarding intellectual properties.
Voting occurred and MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Athletic Review Committee
There was no objection to beginning the discussion of this item earlier than the time certain indicated on the agenda.
Vice President Stokes distributed copies of three memoranda that pertain to the forming of this committee. It became clear this fall that with the Conference change and certain Title IX issues, the Athletics Program needed to be reviewed. Vice President Stokes asked Senator Knox to chair a committee whose charge is to review the program and make some recommendations regarding conference issues, budget issues and Title IX issues.
Discussion included:
1) It was requested that the committee also look into insurance since Intercollegiate Athletics has approached the IRA Committee with a request for an additional $35,000 to cover insurance premiums.
2) It was requested that meetings of the committee be open. [Vice President Stokes stated she has no knowledge that the discussions of this committee are confidential and not open.]
3) What process will be followed once the committee concludes its work and makes any recommendations? [Vice President Stokes stated that if any recommendations are extreme, then either the larger community or the appropriate department or area of the institution would be involved; for example, if it's a budgetary issue, then URPBC would be involved, discontinuation of a program would come to the senate or to a wider audience, etc.]
4) The committee is in the process of gathering information by meeting with a variety of people and discussing many issues. It meets approximately four hours per week and hopes to have some recommendations by early spring term.
5) Regarding open meetings, Senator Knox stated that a request for membership was submitted but there has been no request for attendance; if such a request is made, then a policy would need to be developed. A bulk email was scheduled to be distributed approximately two weeks ago but because of a communication breakdown, that did not happen. Senator Knox will send a message to the campus. In addition, there is a web site that contains information about the committee.
6) It was requested that a report from the committee come to the Senate for discussion. [Senator Knox stated she is operating under the assumption that any report from the committee would be a public document and would come to the senate.]
7) Why does the Athletic Program not have a review process? [Senator Knox stated that her understanding is that it does have a review process, but not one that is parallel with other program reviews found on campus. Because there are shared resources and some overlap between the Athletic Program and the Department of Health and Physical Education, some information is packaged with Health and Physical Education's program review and goes directly to the dean of the College of Professional Studies and does not go through a curriculum program review process.] [According to Professor Gail Fults, a very small portion is part of the Health and Physical Education program review and there is a secondary review. This secondary review is an institutional self study which is sent to the President every five years. The next study is scheduled for June 2001.]
8) When program reviews were first required by the CSU, the athletic programs were created under the normal review process, which at that time were mostly under the jurisdiction of the UCC. Additional requirements from the NCAA affected the Athletic Program review, as did Humboldt's change of its program review process. For example, the inclusion of a resource review in a program review made it much more difficult to assess a program as complex as athletics.
9) Concern was expressed that a few people would decide which athletic programs fit the mission of the university and which do not, and it was recommended that broad public hearings be held so that everyone is informed before any decisions are made. [Senator Knox stated that the committee is reviewing a few documents that are the result of recent meetings and discussions and attempts are being made to work on as many different levels as possible. There are many documents that have been prepared over the last few years and the committee members need to digest the information before making any recommendations.]
10) The need for this to remain an open process is important. Associated Students did appoint a student to this committee, but one must keep in mind that Intercollegiate Athletics affects approximately 400 students at Humboldt and Athletics receives 60 percent of the budget, which translates into a small group of students who receive a large portion of the budget. It was requested that any presentations made to the Academic Senate also be made to Associated Students. [Most of the groups listed under the IRA allocation could be singled out as being a small representative for a particular group or program. The student body should be protecting all the available opportunities for student participation in many activities.]
11) It was noted that the composition of the committee reflects that faculty are lightly represented and concern was expressed that the committee may be slanted toward those who have the greatest interest in this type of committee.
12) Although the chair of the Health & Physical Education Department was listed on the August 25 memo as a member of this committee, the final membership listing did not include this position. Why? [Vice President Stokes stated she could not remember for sure, but believes that it seemed better to have a chair not immediately connected to the committee.]
13) It was requested that a hard copy of a memo be distributed to the campus describing the committee and informing interested parties of ways to communicate with the committee. [This is contained on the web site, but a hard copy could be distributed for those who do not have access to a computer.]
14) The committee is open to all questions and is attempting to identify all aspects that need to be considered.
15) The web site is located under Sean Kearns office and the address will be identified in the bulk email.
It was moved and seconded (Fulgham/Dixon) to adjourn the meeting.
Meeting adjourned 5:15 p.m.