(Latest Revision: Wed May 15 22:14:35 PDT 2002 ) 2002_03_08_SWAS_Notes

2002_03_08_SWAS_Notes


From: "Mark Thompson" <thompson@rhet.csustan.edu>
To: "FACNET" <facnet@listbot.csustan.edu>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2002 11:45:30 -0800

1.	Comments from CFA President Meisenhelder 
2.	Comments from CEO Reed
3.	*Comments from CAO Spence
4.	Constitutional Revision
5.	Master Plan Task Force
6.	CSU Faculty Workload Report
7.      Review of Administrators on the Campuses of the California
        State University
8.	Search for Selection, and Review of Systemwide Administrators
9.	Teaching Associates

Comments from CFA President Meisenhelder: Noted that this was not all
faculty deserve and need, but it is a step forward. Lifting the SSI
maximum will be high on the reopener list for next spring. Monday
meeting to discuss implementation specifics.

Comments from CEO Reed: He is very happy to have a tentative
agreement.  He considers the major challenges and priorities of
the next 5 years:  implementation of Cornerstones and access and
enrollment management.  Planning on a 4% increase in enrollment
and has encouraged presidents to foster tenure-track searches. A
5% reduction is a worst-case scenario; we will likely start off
about $50M short of covering increased enrollment. The
expectation is that system enrollment will increase by about 15K.
Next year's funding is more problematic if the economy does not
have time to recover. Management will approach the BoT with a
proposal on fee increases for non-resident students.

It appears that the BoT is looking forward to approving an MOU
and working together with legislators via a unified method.
Several senators queried the Chancellor about his ideas for
building unity within the system; the repeated response was to
turn the question back on the faculty because he has received
many bad-mannered emails from system faculty.

Comments from CAO Spence: Finds the workload study very positive
and noted it shows faculty are working even harder than in 1990
although teaching loads are somewhat stable. Several other areas
will be pursued jointly by CSU, CFA, and the ASCSU e.g. percent
of tenure track faculty.  In visits to campuses, the main issue
in discussion has been the number and variety of reports required
by Headquarters. Specific to program review reporting, he
emphasized that they are generally the business of the local
campus and are little used by Headquarters or the BoT.
Accountability, including that to WASC, are all driven by
outcomes assessment. Faculty should have no workload related to
items 2-9 for accountability. Accountability items 1 and 10-13 do
derive from faculty input. The proposal is to streamline the
total process through aligning program review with accountability
of outcomes and assessment while Headquarters will suspend
reporting requirements on accountability items 10-13. There is a
need for being able to take a systemwide look at some programs
such as engineering and computer science (and perhaps some areas
such as nursing and social work); it would be helpful if some
programs were all reviewed in the same year systemwide.
Emphasized importance of early testing of high school students to
allow for senior year remediation.

Constitutional Revision: A new ballot will be forwarded to
campuses with minor revisions to prevent any misunderstanding of
constitutional changes. CAO Spence's response includes: "It is
our further understanding that the Academic Senate acted with the
knowledge that an increase to the size of the Senate will
necessitate policies to maintain travel and release time within
the confines of its current budget."

Master Plan Task Force: Final reports for Governance,
Professional Development, and Student Readiness are available at
http://www.sen.ca.gov/masterplan/Reports.htP We are asking for
town hall meeting on all CSU campuses on the final draft of the
Master Plan.  It seems the emphasis is shifting from institutions
to students with an independent agency identified to collect K-16
data and enable a statewide system of accountability and
collaboration.

CSU Faculty Workload Report: Looks at change in the CSU from 1990
till today. The next step is to gather data from the same time
span from comparable institutions across the nation.  From
selected tables:  Faculty workload hours 48.56 (1990), 50.23
(2001)--main increase scholarly and creative activity and
decrease in other activities. Also there has been a substantial
increase in the production of scholarship, due in part to a
higher %age of assistant professors than in 1990.  Percent of
cost of professional activities paid for by the faculty member:
professional meetings 42%, professional development 58%,
scholarly activity 57%.

Fewer 1- and 2-unit courses are being offered. Little variation
number of courses, students, units, student credit hours, or
preparations. Also the amount of individualized instruction and
the number of committees have not changed appreciably. Also the
number of hours of student contact outside of class has remained
steady at about 24.

Faculty attitudes: tenure track faculty clearly feel important to
their department or program, about one-third feel they are
treated with respect at the institution. Lecturers feel more
valued by the institution than by their department or program,
are more likely to be long-term employees, and spend
substantially more time in scholarly activity than they did in
1990.

General conclusion: under a period of many changes CSU faculty
have increased committee service, use of technology, and
scholarly activity while maintaining their 1990 level of contact
with students and instructional load.

Review of Administrators on the Campuses of the California State
University: (first reading) This is a response in part to a claim
on some campuses that the MPP review supplants the need for a
review more inclusive of faculty. The resolution responds
directly to a request from campus senate chairs.

Search for Selection, and Review of Systemwide Administrators:
(first reading) Intent is to initiate a review and possible
revision of policies to ensure a more inclusive selection
process.

Teaching Associates: Passed unanimously. Reads something like:
"That, in light of newly revised Classification and Qualification
Standards for Teaching Associates (TAs), issued by the California
State University, February 19, 2002 [ ], the Academic Senate of
the California State University urge all campuses to review
and/or develop campus policy on the hiring, supervision, and
evaluation of Teaching Associates."

~mt