ACADEMIC
SENATE
MINUTES
November 10,
2005
11:30 A.M. - 1:00 P.M. ACADEMIC
SENATE CHAMBERS
Members Present:
Alva, Buck, Burgtorf, Dabirian, Drezner, Emry, Fidalgo, Fitch, Fromson, Gass,
Gordon, Guerin, Hagan, Hall, Hewitt, Holland, Jones, Junn, Kanel, Kantardjieff,
Kelly, Kirtman, Klassen, Klein, Kreiner, Liverpool, Lovell, Matz, Meyer,
Michalopoulos,
Absent: Bedell,
Hassan, Rhoten, Syed, Taylor, Walicki
I.
CALL TO ORDER
Vice Chair Hall (for Chair Bedell) called the
meeting to order at 11:34 a.m.
II.
URGENT BUSINESS
Senator Kreiner requested an item to be discussed
as urgent business regarding the selection of members of the search committee
for the Associate Dean of ECS. He
requested that the Senate direct ECS to comply with UPS 210.007. Vice Chair
Hall requested the consent of the body to discuss the issue for ten minutes and
received unanimous consent. Senator Kreiner stated that the members of their
ECS Associate Dean search committee were not elected per UPS 210.007.
Senator Smith explained that it is difficult to
select associate deans in all colleges per UPS 210.007 because most colleges,
except for CBE, do not have their own college faculty senates. For example, HSS
created their associate dean search committee by looking for elected committee
members such as DPC members. He stated that he understood that ECS used their DPC chairs to put together a
committee. He then suggested to the Chair of the Senate that we really need to
amend the UPS on the selection of associate dean search committee members
because right now, we have a policy that really can’t be enforced.
Senator Kreiner responded by saying that this was
not quite the case for ECS and moreover, that the members of the ECS search
committee were not elected specifically for the purpose of recommending a new associate
dean. He suggested that it would be more straightforward if departments could elect
their own representative for the ECS associate dean search committee.
Senator Michalopoulos
asked for clarification as to any action. Vice Chair Hall suggested that the
Executive Committee could take the item under further discussion.
Senator Kreiner made the motion that ECS be
directed to comply with UPS 210.007. Senator Shapiro asked for a point of
order, saying that he did not hear a second for the motion. Vice Chair Hall
responded that there was no second for the motion. Someone then seconded the
motion and Vice Chair acknowledged the second.
Senator Buck stated that he didn’t believe that
the policy is being followed and that the Vice President indicated that it is
not possible to follow the policy. So we need to find some way to follow the
policy or change it, because either way, the policy should not be ignored. He
suggested that the Executive Committee might address the issue. Vice Chair Hall
acknowledged Senator Buck’s comments and suggested that the Senate needs to
address the document, which is out of date and doesn’t seem to function very
well for every college.
Senator Shapiro stated that he agreed that the old
policy should be changed, but that the associate dean needs to be a person who
the dean is confident in and who can work with the dean and that it’s not clear
that randomly electing people for associate dean is the best policy. He
suggested that we look at the policy very carefully.
Senator Pasternack asked for a Point of
Information and stated that the issue here is electing a committee to make
recommendations to the dean, and not selecting an associate dean.
Vote
was taken, M/S/P [Kreiner/Tavakolian]:
Motion passed, 1 no, 2 abstentions.
Senator Junn inquired as to the status of the ECS
search committee’s recommendation for the associate dean in light of the
motion. Vice Chair Hall stated that the Senate’s vote for ECS to comply with
UPS 210.007 would serve as advice from the body to the college, the Dean, and the
Vice President, and that they will have to sort how to proceed given the
recommendation by the Senate.
III.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
·
Senator
·
President
Gordon followed up on the Convocation ceremony by speaking to the Senate. Though
he had intended to, he did not discuss equity salary increases at the ceremony.
He reported that 86% (or almost 9 out 10) of the assistant professors that
submitted applications for salary equity increases received them. Of the
associate professors that applied, 47% of them were granted increases, and
10-12% of applicants with full-time professor status received increases.
In his observation of the whole application
process, President Gordon commented that there seemed to be some confusion
among faculty about the difference between the general salary increase and the
market equity increase. He suggested that because of the confusion about the
two types of increases, many fine faculty members may have submitted
applications, but after quantitative analyses were completed, were not granted
the increase.
In response to President Gordon’s announcement,
Senator
Senator Pasternack commented that there is a
problem at the system level, not the campus level, that full professors are
underpaid. He stated that according to AACSB
guidelines for full professors in business, he and his colleagues (that have
full professor status) are underpaid. Senator Pasternack asked for
clarification on whether or not the CPEC salary gap or AACSB salary guidelines will be used to make decisions
during the next cycle of application processing for equity salary increases.
Vice President Smith responded that they are
following up on concerns about salary that were raised at an Academic Senate
meeting in May or April. Some junior faculty who were serving on search
committees had raised the issue that the candidates being hired by the
departments are making up to 25% more than assistant professors in the
departments. VP Smith said that based on this information, an analysis was
completed, but then another concern was raised at an Academic Senate meeting that
Associate professors were making less than some of the new hires. The purpose
of the market equity increase analysis was not to check merit raises and how
individuals at the top of the scale fit in against individuals at other
institutions, but to examine internal equity in hiring. VP Smith stated that
most of the money, if not all, went towards fixing this issue.
Senator Klassen asked for the total amount of
money that was available to be awarded. President Gordon stated that the amount
was around $300,000. Senator Guerin clarified this amount, stating that it was
$350,000. She shared that Article 31.23 authorizes campus presidents to take
care of equity issues that arise and that faculty can get market equity
increases as well. Senator Guerin stated that many of her colleagues are
unwilling to go through the process of interviewing and getting an offer from
another campus. Many view that practice as unethical. She also reported that
the Chancellor, at last week’s Statewide Academic Senate meeting, laid out a
plan to take care of all of the CSU salary gap issues. The plan will span five
years and include at 3.65% increase for compensation next year and over a
number of years. By 2010 or 2011, all CSU employees would receive a 5+%
compensation increase. Guerin expressed concerned over this plan because she
feels that it’s a very long-term plan and a very gradual solution to a very
serious problem. She also expressed concern that this plan was passed as being
funded by student fee increases. President Gordon responded that Senator
Guerin’s statement about the plan being funded by student fee increases was
incorrect. He explained that when he attended the Board of Trustees meeting, it
was clearly said that student fees would pay no more of a proportion of the salary
increases to close all gaps, as they would for any other part of the
University.
Senator Fitch added that unlike Senator Guerin,
she knows faculty members who are applying for jobs on other campuses because
of the lack of morale, salary, and the excessive workload at CSUF. As a result,
she stated, we could lose some very good people.
Senator Kelly asked if the criteria for evaluating
the associate and full professors has changed from the first round and requested
if so, that it be formally announced. President Gordon’s reply was that there
was no plan to change the criteria.
Senator Kanel shared that she had been asked by
colleagues in her department to mention that while they appreciated being
considered for salary increases, some received only a 1% increase, and that did
not help morale. Many faculty members feel that CSUF is just a “stepping stone”
university.
President Gordon shared with the body that there
have been several requests for additional budget communication and expressed
that he hopes that the body had had the chance to review the e-mail sent to all
campus employees by Sherri Newcomb that morning. It is the first piece in a
budget communication process and contains a variety of budget information. The
report includes current and future budget planning information and devotes an
entire paragraph for the five year plan to close the employee salary. President
Gordon encouraged the body to review the communication and to refer any
suggestions to Sherri Newcomb.
Senator Guerin expressed that it is important for
the body to recognize the efforts made by the President and Vice President to
address the salary equity issues. The President accepted her recognition and
stated that he did not want anyone to feel that they walk away from challenges.
He explained that when campus employees requested his and the Vice President’s
consideration on equity issues this spring, he felt that they made the effort,
in good faith, to satisfy them.
Senator Fitch pointed out that some faculty did
not realize that May 20th was the deadline for the first round
before it was announced retroactively. Therefore, they have applications in
from this summer. She asked if this would affect the outcome of their
application. Vice President Smith stated this would not affect their
applications and that they would be moved and considered with the second round.
·
President
Gordon acknowledged that the Women’s Soccer team won the Big West title. The
team was selected to host the first two games of the NCAA Tournament on our
campus. He recognized that this is quite an advance and a movement for the team
and encouraged everyone to cheer them on tomorrow night when they play at Titan
Stadium.
·
Senator
Dabirian reported that IT is enhancing security across campus by implementing
an automatic desktop lock on all campus PC’s. The system will lock after twenty
minutes of inactivity.
The campus has received over 70 million attacks to
its system since July 1, 2005 at a rate of 15-20 million attacks per month. And
these numbers only account for the ones that IT caught. Senator Shapiro stated
that the number of attacks that were successful should be reported in the data.
Senator Dabirian stated that very few were successful. IT has set up firewalls
and VPN’s to prevent harm from attacks. CSUF has taken more security measures
than any other CSU campus.
·
Before
providing a briefing on the Time-to-Degree initiative, Senator Alva announced
that Dr. Patten, Professor of Humanities,
·
Senator Alva
proceeded to discuss the initiatives to facilitate graduation and requested
that members forward any ideas or suggestions on how to address the issues
regarding degree completion to her or Barry Pasternack.
In the document that she provided to the Senate,
she explained that there are 22 recommendations outlined, divided in four
categories:
·
Category One
asks campuses to look at efficiency.
·
Category Two
suggests examining the strategies in place to support students on different
paths towards the bachelor’s degree.
·
Category
Three discusses tools to keep students on an efficient path to the bachelor’s
degree.
·
Category Four
provides advising strategies and practices.
This topic was discussed further and suggestions
offered included:
·
Take into
account the outside work and family responsibilities of the students. Assess
how many units they take, how many hours they work, and their household
statuses.
·
Consider that
younger students may change interests during the course of their time at CSUF.
·
Find ways to
fund advising and services for students so that it is available to those who
seek it.
·
Address the
issues that arise within “hierarchal” majors when students repeat courses.
Senator Alva also explained that Time-to-Degree terminology
was changed to “Facilitating Graduation.” Emphasis is not being placed on
getting students out in four years. The committee for Facilitating Graduation
is reviewing CSUF practices and strategies to ensure that those who want to
finish a degree program in four years are able to, and those who want to
explore and pursue other options are able to do it at his or her own pace, but
still in an efficient manner, and without having to graduate with a tremendous number
of excess units.
Senator Pasternack mentioned that statewide
statistics indicated that students complete an average of 142 to 143 units.
Transfer students may take even more units than the average amount. He also
reported that the Statewide Academic Senate approved a motion to ask campuses
to address their policies on the repetition of courses.
·
Senator Hall
expressed appreciation to the Athletics Department for its distribution of
athletics passes to all of the Senators.
·
Senator Hall
also announced the Chair’s decision that ex-officio members will be considered
non-voting members of committees, with the exception of the ex-officio members
of the Planning Resource and Budget Committee.
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
M/S/P [Junn/Pasternack] to approve ASD
05-109 Academic Senate Minutes 10-6-05 with corrections.
V. CHAIR’S REPORT
No Chair’s report. Chair Bedell was absent due to
illness.
VI.
STATEWIDE ACADEMIC SENATE REPORT
It was reported that will be a long process to
finalize a contract and that most likely, no decision would be made before the
holidays.
Also, CSU’s position in summer session is to cut
summer session salaries back by about 20%. So, instead of being paid 10% of
one’s salary, he or she would be paid 8%. This is still subject to
negotiations.
VII.
CONSENT CALENDAR
M/S/P [Junn/Gass] to approve Consent Calendar: Nominees
to Standing Committee
INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE
Nominee: Abbie Brown (EDUC)
Continuing: Tae-Wan Ryu (ECS); Dana
Loewy (CBE); Collete Childres (Library);
Marilyn
Stone (HHD); Charles Greib (ARTS); Thomas Clanin (COMM);
Robert
Koch (CNSM); William Marelich (SOC SCI)
VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
No items of
Unfinished Business were discussed.
IX.
PROPOSED RESCISSIONS – FIRST READING
Items 9.1 – 9.3 (ASD 05-115, ASD 05-116, and ASD
05-117) were referred back to the Faculty Affairs Committee for reconsideration
and review.
Item 9.4 (ASD 05-118) was not discussed due to
lack of time.
X.
NEW BUSINESS
Items 10.1 and 10.2 (ASD 05-113 and ASD 05-114)
were not discussed due to lack of time.
The meeting adjourned at 12:56 p.m.