August 28, 2003













11:30 A.M. - 1:00 P.M.†††††††††††††††††††††††††† ††††††††††††††††††††††† †††††††ACADEMIC SENATE CHAMBERS

Members Present:Allen, Arkenberg, Bedell, Boyum, Buck, Byrnes, Cox, Emry, Erickson, Fromson, Gannon, Gass, Gilbert, Gordon, Guerin, Hagan, Hall, Hewitt, Jones, Junn, Klassen, Kreiner, Meyer, Michalopoulos, Nanjundappa, Parker, Pasternack, Rahmatian, Reisman, Rhoten, Rimmer, Russell, Rutemiller, Schroeder, Shapiro, Smith, Sutphen, Vargas, Wolverton and Wong


Members Absent:Fitch, Hall, Kelly, Martinez, Randall, Taulli, and Tavakolian


I.              CALL TO ORDER

Chair Gilbert called the meeting to order and welcomed senators back after a summerís rest.



It was m/p [Bedell] as an item of urgent business that Vice President Smith or another member of the administration in the room provide an update to the Senate to clarify the status of fall enrollments and target in light of confusion/frustration Bedell observed among department chairs and faculty.Bedell distributed a list of six questions.


1.       What is our current FTES and how does it relate to what was predicted?Explanation of any difference?


Smith: I believe our current count is about 23,000 FTES.That is lighter than we expected, and the reason is that the freshman class is smaller than we anticipatedóslightly over target, but much smaller than expected.Normally, approximately 10% of freshmen would be no shows, but this year we are running about 16 Ĺ -17% no shows.Upper division and post bacc adds are also a tad low, but not as low as freshmen.Freshman students average between 12 and 13 units; we were holding spaces to accommodate 3800 freshmen who had sent in intents to register with a $50 fee. At the end of the day on Monday, it became obvious that many of the freshmen would not be registering; we confirmed that we would have extra FTES that could be allocated to meet the needs of our upper division or students beyond first time freshman status. We looked at the enrollment data from the Monday night run on Tuesday; yesterday we requested some of the colleges to open seats in as much as they would not be getting enrollment from the first-time freshmen.Thus, when we saw that the expected freshmen were not coming, we had seats available for other students; this is why some departments have been getting changing information regarding enrollment.


2.       What are the expectations of the administration regarding faculty adding students to classes?Closing classes, etc.?


Smith:Let me go over a little history about what has happed to our target since last May.In June, from a target of what was projected to this fall, we lost 582 FTES in the first round of budget cuts; that was the $69Ĺ million additional cut to the system.At the Board of Trusteesí meeting in July, there was another cut of $15 million.This campus incurred an additional 207 FTES cut. We have been very concerned about over-enrollment because the Chancellor at the end of July indicated there will be a penalty for over enrollment.Campuses that over-enroll will have fees deducted from next yearís budget for that over-enrollment; therefore, the strategy is to meet target or to be slightly below target.Unlike prior years, there is a large disincentive in the budget for going over target.


Question from Senator Erickson:†† If a college that is under-enrolled and then other colleges are over-enrolled, will the under-enrolled college be penalized because it does not make target?


Smith:No, in the past we have not penalized colleges for under-enrollment in the spring.In setting targets, we are looking toward the future; when we see that the applications for the college are not coming in, then the FTES for the college will be reduced. Target is not reduced if it is down because the college closed sections resulting in a drop.Target depends more on application trends.



3.       What was the rationale for how the ď900Ē were handled at that time?Future response to a similar problem?


Smith:Obviously, that was a problem!Actually, we disenrolled 1400.Earlier in that week-- and I canít recall the date on that--we enrolled about 400 to 500 students who had not paid any fees.I donít know if any of them came back, but certainly we had no complaints from that group.We have a normal disenrollment right before Titan II, and we do this every year.We disenroll students to get the seats back.If we donít disenroll these students, then we have to overload classes knowing that we will have some no-shows, but not knowing where they will be. In a normal disenrollment, about 2 to 6% of FTES are disenrolled for non-payment.When they come back, they must pay first.This is something we have been doing every year.


The difference this year is that we had the fee increase after students had already paid fees.Those that had paid fees, but not the fee increase, were upset.Further they were upset that the message they received was by email and not hard copy.Now remember the letter went out to 19,000 plus students, and all but 908 paid.The 908 were upset because some said they do not use email during the summer; some said they did not know how to access the email during the summer and they did not get the message. They were disenrolled, and the demand in Titan II was still very substantial and their seats were taken.We tried our best to get them back into their schedule.Melissa Whatley and Dawn Wilson in Admissions and Records worked oneĖon-one with these students, and I think 85 or 86% have been accommodated according to the story in yesterdayís Daily Titan.The Associate Deans in the colleges also worked with the students.


In hindsight, we should have sent a hard copy; hopefully, a higher percentage would have paid.We do have to recognize that some students did send in an email stating that they paid their fees, and because the fee increase came after they had paid, they should not have to pay. Their logic was that if you buy an automobile and two months later and there is an increase, they donít come after you saying they want more money.Unfortunately, the government doesnít operate like a car dealer.So it was a little problem on that front also.So, the ď900Ē obviously was a challenge to the campus; in hindsight, we certainly would have done it differently.Hopefully, we will have them all back in their classes.






4.       Will departments be punished/rewarded in terms of target hit or miss?Explanation of why and how?


Smith:Senator Erickson raised the question about penalties for being over and under target. We have some departments that have gone way over target, and mostly this is in H&SS.The concern about going way over the target is in part related to general education.There are some departments in H&SS that really could use some additional enrollment.The hope is that there would be a sharing of general education classes as opposed to certain departments coming 20% or 25% over target and other departments struggling to meet target.So, it isnít that there is a penalty; we are trying to hold over-enrollment down, so that other departments can share in the wealth.We then donít have to move FTEF from a college.


5.       Will spring 2004 admissions remain closed?Why or why not?


Smith:We will monitor enrollments this week.


Senator Russell:Would you address again what happens to departments that are under target this term?I understand you want to even it out in the long run, but am not sure what the repercussions are for these departments?


Smith:In Academic Affairs, we have a fixed student/faculty ratio.Next year, we have to allocate targets carefully.Business is a great example. Business will be way under this year; we will take a look at how applications are coming in for Business.If applications are light again next year, we will probably lower their target. This is what we have done year in and year out with colleges.


Every year, college enrollments are adjusted.Colleges that come in with strong enrollment, get more enrollment.But this year, we have trying to hold it down because of the penalty from the chancellorís office.We told the colleges running up targets this year will get them into trouble and they are not going to get more FTES. Several colleges had many more sections in the schedule than they had budget to cover. Money for over-enrollment has now disappeared; departments that run up their targets will not get larger targets.We have been told in legislative language that the CSU will be fixed at this yearís target next year.We are working on the assumption of a fixed FTES for next year.


Russell:After working many years to get higher enrollments, I am just thinking that some chairs fear what an error on either side is going to cost them.


Smith:There were a couple of departments in several colleges that were really running up targets.It could be because of high demand, but when we start looking at 20-30% over target, we really have to look at targets where other departments are struggling.One of our goals is to help the struggling departments first, because obviously we donít want to have to go to layoff mode.We want to help protect all departments.The way to protect them is to help those with low enrollments to build up the enrollment some.


6.       What is the impact of fall 2003 enrollments on the ďImpaction Plan,Ē if any?


Smith:My concern with the impaction plan is that our service area is too wide, and we still have too many applications.I think the change will be how impaction affects yield.We run about a 20% yield on application to actually enroll; that possibly could increase with impaction.


Shapiro:I am curious as why our service area is all of Orange County?


Smith:We are the CSU in Orange County and our charge is to serve all of Orange County.


Shapiro:Where is that written in stone?


Smith:It might not be written in stone, but the total county is viewed as our service area.Also, we now have a branch campus at El Toro, which needs services in the southern and western part of the county.Last year in the fall of 2001 applications, we received about half of the applications from our service area, so there is some room for growth, and we should be able to service all of Orange County plus the three school districts to the north staying within the impaction plan.Based on the yields, we are willing to go outside of the service area to accept students as needed.


Shapiro:It doesnít make any sense when those students who live closer to Cal State Long Beach are in our service area.When we are having problems here, why not yield those areas to Long Beach?


Smith:I donít believe those high schools in the western part of the county are in the primary service area of Long Beach. They might be closer, but they are not in their service area.If districts are excluded from campus service areas, students in those districts would be at a disadvantage.


Gordon:What Ephraim is saying, Mark, is that those students that you are referring to Long Beach selected their service area several years ago.If those students want to attend outside their primary service area, they have higher criteria to meet.


Shapiro:I understand that, but it seems like that is something that the Chancellorís office could adjust.


Gordon:Actually, the campus selects its service area.At a meeting last spring, we looked at the three biggest senior high schools; they were all in different counties for Cal State Fullerton.Students select were they want to go, and Long Beach, for instance, draws a number of students from other parts around Orange County.So, I donít know whether the schools you are referring to are in their primary service area.They probably are not, and so that would require higher admission standards for them.


Smith:I would say also besides the impaction on freshman, we need to give a close look to our upper division transfer students.Last year, we closed just before the holiday break in December, but it could be that we are going to be looking at impaction on upper division transfers in the future. There is a fear that with the number of applications in the system, we really have to be protected from the first.Even though we closed everything down pretty tight in our undergraduate program, letís say, by the end of December, we still had 30,000 applications sent in this fall.


Gordon:Ephraim mentioned a few minutes ago that, as you all know, because you have seen it in the newspaper, the legislature has decided CSU should stay flat next year with no enrollment money.I found out only yesterday that there are members of the Assembly that are discussing now whether or not they should allocate funds for enrollment next year because of calls they have received from their constituency.I donít think I have ever opened a year that had such fluidity as right now.Everything we are discussing now could radically change after October 7, depending upon who the next governor is going to be.The decisions made by the legislature, all of these changes could change.Itís a moving target that we are trying to hit.


Guerin:On question one, I missed the projected target or predicted target?


Smith:Right now, our official target including YRO is 25,061.That is our projected target for our college year, and right now with closure in spring and normal growth, I think we will be under that target.


Gordon:I donít want to miss the point that Ephraim made earlier, between June and July an additional $84.5 million was assessed to the California State University.That is a very substantial reduction over those two months.


Kreiner:It was mentioned that you were going to extend permits a few days.How many days?


Smith:We told the Daily Titan today that the permit to add by September 8th would be accepted until the close of business on September 10th.


Bedell:I want to be sure then, on the second question, the answer would be that if your department is at or above target, you should be discouraging adding students to classes.


Smith:No, I think the question was more in terms of running up enrollment.Our first goal is to meet the needs of students.We donít want students sitting there with nine hours saying I couldnít get three hours and this is slowing me down.We want to take care of students.We talk about some departments running up enrollments using the general education program, when students can take courses in other departments to meet the same requirement. If there are a couple of dozen sociology majors who need a class to graduate, we want those students accommodated.Remember that one of our targets in the system is to improve the time to degree.Our largest category of students on this campus is seniors, and some of them have challenges.


Buck:†† I am still not sure what the current situation is.I had a colleague come by this morning who had a bunch of students he was told he could not add, so we told them there is no room.


Smith:Obviously, some changes were made after we determined that the freshmen were not coming.That was our greatest challenge, and also a challenge for the students.One thing I forgot to mention earlier is that this year we are determined to hold class sizes to the number of students in the class so that we do not go over limits set by the fire marshal. On this campus, that is a challenge.Last year, I think we had 118 classes over limits set by the fire marshal, so our first goal is that we would not add a student to a class when, technically, there is not a seat in the room.So when there are classes where there are seats available, students can add.


Buck:If we are below target in the fall, does that means we will have more seats will be available in the spring?


Smith:If we are below the target in the fall, it means that we will ease up on student flow to the spring and let them take more units.You recall how we register students now is that they can take up to 16 units during Titan II and at the close of Titan II.Some years we open up to 19 units and other years we hold itótrying to hold down the enrollment.Obviously, if seats are available we would open up to 19 units earlier.


Buck:Are there disadvantages to coming in under target?


Smith:It is a question of how much under target you want to be.The goal is to be around target but slightly under.


Dean Klammer:This year we know that enrollments will be lower in the spring because we are not admitting any new students; therefore, colleges may be planning to be over target as we normally defined it for the fall to compensate for the fewer students in the spring.


Smith:Dr. Gordon and I will be discussing this.When we have a better handle on what the fall enrollments look like, we will decide exactly what the process will be in the spring.


Senator Emry:I realize the rationale for staying within target, but I am wondering about the political ramification of closing classes with open seats when instructors get paid for that class and we have spent the money for the seats?In the present political climate, many voters feel that bureaucracy is simply pushing or cutting down to the end where it hurts the most.How do you respond to that?Why do we have do it, but how do you respond to the concerns of the students, parents, and so on?


Gordon:We have been told that if we come in over target next year, we are going to increase our budget reduction because the fees over our target are going to be reduced in our budget; in essence, we are adding to our own budget reduction, and that is not something that we want to do.


Emery:I donít think our community will accept that response.I understand, but I donít think that our community will accept that response.


Gordon:Well, otherwise we risk putting ourselves in the worst position in terms of our own budget.


Emery:I think the system has created a public relations problem for us.


Smith:I think you have to look at the origin of the problem.In the past, we put the extra students in and we have gone over the target. In the following year, we would always collect the money.In the system, we have been doing this year in and year out. This year, there was a change during the budget process that really started with the legislative analyst reviewing our budget.The governor recommended $45 million for the 6000 extra students last year, but the legislative analyst said that because the CSU has already accommodated these students, they really donít need the money.We did not receive the money; therefore, the message is clear.Put the extra students in the class, we will take more money from you.I think you have to explain to the people itís a bad situation, but we are in a situation where, if we put extra students in a class, then our budget next year is reduced.††


I think that on this campus we have to be careful.One of our top priorities has been to decrease the student/faculty ratio and not increase it.Running over and getting penalized will lead to an increased student/faculty ratio.Even with some pretty serious budget cuts, we have been able to protect the student/faculty ratio.


Time Certain

12:00 Noon

William Barrett, Associate Vice President

Subject:Parking Update


Mr. Barrett reported on the parking situation at Cal State Fullerton.He noted that through a number of mitigation measures the influx of several thousand cars Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and today was accommodated.Mr. Barrett said that the primary complaint was capping student permits at 19,000 because there are still several thousand students who want permits.He said he will create a waiting list and may begin to increase beyond the 19,000 limit as the semester proceeds; additionally, daily permits are not available until 3:00 p.m. Parking permits were also required the first week of school for the first time this year.Mitigation measures included stack-parking 1400 cars a day and the use of off-campus lots.Parking at Arrowhead Pond is not being heavily used and is too expensive to justify running shuttles back and forth.


Mr. Barrett was also pleased to announce that an agreement has been reached with OCTA, which will accept the Titan Card as a free bus pass beginning September 15.Students, faculty, and staff will be able to use their CSUF identification to travel anywhere in Orange County.††




Time Certain

12:30 p.m.

Judith Anderson, Executive Vice President

Subject:El Toro Update


Judith Anderson briefed the Senate about the pending sale of the El Toro Base and presented a concept/mission plan that has been developed to engage prospective developers with a long term goal of maintaining a permanent Cal State Fullerton presence on the base once the property sells.A copy of the promotional brochure depicting the conceptual plan was distributed to the members.


As another item of urgent business, it was moved by Senator Fromson to ask Senator Parker and Amir Dabirian to update the Senate on the current status about worms and viruses that affected our computers.Motion carried.


Parker explained that both Blaster and Sobig had invaded the campus through student computers and non-rollout machines that connected to the campus-protected network.IT is developing a plan to ensure that the network remains viable in such cases, but this will require that IT play a specific role with respect to anybody who wants to connect to the network.†† He noted that PAB is currently crafting a document about how that might work.



Senator Nanjundappa welcomed the senators back and reminded the members to attend the Welcome Reception for All Faculty on Wednesday, September 3 at 12:00 noon in the Academic Senate Chambers.



Chair Gilbert noted that due to the time constraints, he will issue it as a written report.



Senator Arkenberg withdrew the Academic Senate Marathon Meeting Minutes of August 29, 2003 from the consent calendar; Chair Gilbert withdrew item F and the CSUF Foundation Board of Directors.


It was m/s/p to approve the following Consent Calendar as amended.


A.†† ASD 03-66 Academic Senate Meeting Minutes 5-15-03

B.†† ASD 03-78 Academic Senate Meeting Minutes 5-22-03

D.†† ASD 03-82 Academic Senate Electoral Meeting Minutes 5-29-03

E.†† ASD 03-81 Academic Senate Calendar Fall 2003 Ė Spring 2004




†††††††††† Nominee:††††††††††††††† Barry Pasternack (CBE)

†††† Confirmed 5/29/03:††† Ann Sheffield (ARTS); Robert Mead (CBE); Doug Liverpool (Student Affairs); Irene Matz (COMM); Kim Norman (HDCS)



Nominees:†††††††††††††† Joseph Massey (COMM); Cindy Martinez (HDCS); Barbra Erickson (HSS)

Continuing:††††††††††††† Hamid Tavakolian (CBE); Juan Sanchez Munoz (HDCS); HŚken Rosengren (ARTS)


FACULTY AFFAIRS COMMITTEETerms:One 2-year; One 1-year

Nominees:†††††††††††††† G. Nanjundappa (HSS); Debbie Rose (HDCS)

Confirmed 5/29/03:††† Rhonda Allen (HSS); Jane Hipolito (HSS); Farouk Abdelwahed (CBE); Pat Bril (LIB)



Nominees:†††††††††††††† Joanne Gass (HSS); Maqsood Chaudhry (ECS); Nancy Peleaz (CNSM)

Confirmed 5/29/03:††† Neil Granitz (CBE); John Hickok (Library); Jaki Coffman (HDCS); Natalie Fousekis (HSS); Joe Arnold (ARTS); Gail Love (COMM)



Nominee:††††††††††††††† Armando Martinez-Cruz (CNSM)



Nominee:††††††††† ††††† Gustavo Vargas (CBE)

Confirmed 5/29/03:††† Katherine Powers (ARTS); Shari McMahan (HDCS); Susan Jacobsen (HSS); David DeVries (COMM); Jochen Burgtorf (HSS); Amybeth Cohen (CNSM)



Nominee:††††††††††††††† Vance Wolverton (ARTS)

Confirmed 5/29/03:††† Jeff Kottler (HDCS); Zena Pearlstone (ARTS); Cora Granata (HSS); Denise Stanley (CBE); Mary Kay Crouch (HSS)


LIBRARY COMMITTEE Terms:One 2-year; One 1-year

Nominees:†††††††††††††† Toya Wyatt (COMM);Stephen Stambough (HSS)

Confirmed 5/29/03:††† Nashat Saweris (CNSM); Betty Chavis (CBE); Lynda Randall (HDCS); Svetlana Efremova-Reed (ARTS); Jeff Kuo (ECS); Shari Starrett (HSS)



Nominees:†††††††† ††††† Carol Bednar (Library);Carmen Dunlap (HDCS)

Confirmed 5/29/03:††† David Falconer (ECS); Renae Bredin (HSS); James Woodward (At-Lg); Diane Witmer (COMM) 1-yr; Susan Hallman (ARTS); Mark Stohs (CBE); Mark Shapiro (CNSM); Wayne Hobson (HSS);



Nominees:†††††††††††††† C. Jessie Jones (HDCS); Pamela Caldwell (COMM); Jim Taulli (ARTS); Joni Norby ††(CBE); Nancy Snow (COMM)

Continuing:†††† †††††††† Rosemary McGill (Library); Carol Barnes (HDCS); William Laton (CNSM)





Nominees:††††† †††††††† Brady Rhodes (CNSM); Vic Brajer (ASC member); Pending



Nominees:†††††††††††††† Dawn Anderson (HDCS); Robert Emry (COMM); Grace Cho (HDCS)

Continuing:††††††††††††† Gayle Vogt (CBE); Harriet Edwards (CNSM)



Nominee:††††††††††††††† Armando Martinez-Cruz (CNSM)

Continuing:††††††††††††† David Wong (CBE); Lenny Wiersma (HDCS); David Falconer (ECS); Sharon Milburn (HDCS);



Nominees:†††††††††††††† Betty Chavis (CBE); Steve Walk (HDCS); Fred Ramirez (HDCS)





Nominees:†††††††††††††† Richard Wiseman (COMM); Vic Brajer (ASC Member)





Nominees:†††††††††††††† Allan Axelrad (HSS); Kevin Meehan (HSS)





Nominees:††††††††††††††† Marika Becz (ARTS); Patti Laguna (HDCS)


HONORS BOARDTerms: One 2-year, One 3-year

Nominees:††††††††††††††† J. Michael Russell (HSS); Zena Pearlstone (ARTS)

Continuing:†††††††††††††† Marcelo Tolmasky (CNSM); Jochen Burgtorf (HSS); Edward Fink (COMM)


Titan Student Union Governing BoardTerms:One 2-year

Nominee:††††††††††††††††† Debra Lockwood (ARTS)

Continuing:†††††††††††††† Ron Oliver (HDCS)



Nominees:††††††††††††††† Reyes Fidalgo (HSS)

Continuing:†††††††††††††† Larry Peters (ARTS); Mildred Donoghue (HDCS)






A.†† ASD 03-86 Resolution in Support of the Kindergarten-University Public Education Facilities Bond Act of 2004


It was m/s/p [Fromson/Nanjundappa] to approve documentASD 03-86, which was approved unanimously.


The meeting adjourned at 12:57 p.m.