Summary of the

Meeting of the Academic Senate, CSU

January 23-24, 2003


Lester Pincu, Secretary

Academic Senate of

The California State University




The Senate meeting opened with a moment of silence in memory of our colleague Hal Charnofsky who passed away December 21, 2002.


Chair Kegley called the Senate's attention to a number of items, including the group on Academic Technology Planning and the campus visit schedules. She also reported on the Higher Education Symposium, sponsored by the Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for Education.  She also informed the Senate that the Budget Advisory committee and the Board of Trustees' Committee on Finance will be meeting monthly and these meetings will be open meetings.


Chair Kegley informed the Senate that the Executive Committee has called a special plenary session for the Senate to meet as a Committee of the Whole from 3:30-6:00 pm on February 13.  The campus Senate Chairs are meeting on that day, and they will be encouraged to stay for this meeting.  The basic topic will be the budget.


Chair Kegley spoke about the necessity of good communication.  She stated that reports, agendas, and minutes would be linked to our web site, and could be accessed at:


Chair Kegley stated that since she had provided her report in written form she would not take the Senate's time to read it.  She would entertain questions about items in the report.

Items from Chair Kegley's written report

The following is a summary of parts of Chair Kegley's written report:


Academic Technology Planning Committee meetings, November 15 and December 6, 2002

At these two meetings, the Academic Technology Planning Committee (ATPC) discussed and established project goals, framed a vision for academic technology in the CSU, and developed a set of guiding principles for the planning process as well as a set of planning assumptions.  The group also began development of a set of criteria that will guide selection of initiatives and projects that will constitute the final academic technology plan. There was also discussion of a communication plan which can be accessed on the web at


Academic Council (Provosts and Academic Affairs Vice Presidents), November 19, 2002

At the meeting of the Academic Council (Provosts and Academic Affairs Vice Presidents), there were a number of important updates.  The first was an update on the CMS Student Administration as it is progressing on various pilot campuses.  The pilot campuses reported good progress and fair satisfaction with the project as it was proceeding.  Louanne Kennedy and I expressed concern, on behalf of the Facilitating Graduation Task Force, that CMS be able to facilitate graduation checks.  The financial and human resources cost of the Teacher Preparation Evaluation results and the Teacher Performance Assessments proposed by CTC was of great concern. Executive Vice Chancellor David Spence announced the formation of an Advisory Task Force under the leadership of Professor Robert Cichowski, on leave from CPSU San Luis Obispo, based at the Chancellor's Office as the Associate Director of Teacher Education and Public School Programs.  The Task Force will review blended programs with a view to providing an answer to Senator Dede Alpert's expressed desire for an Undergraduate Major in Education (SB 1646). 

Council of Library Directors, CSU, November 21, 2002

The council recommended a policy on Library Support for Joint Doctorates.  The recommended policy is as follows:

            When developing joint doctoral programs with CSU/UC campuses, in the area of information resource support, all campuses offering the programs will have a written agreement stating that all faculty and students teaching or enrolled in the program on all participating campuses will have equal access to information resources in all formats that support the doctoral program.

            In addition, as a part of the planning process for the program, collection development librarians in appropriate disciplines from each campus will assess the quality and depth of the existing collections to support a doctoral level program; identify the core collection required as onsite collections for each campus which need to be purchased; recommend titles as shared resources; arrange cooperative licensing agreements for electronic resources; and make budget recommendations for the augmentation of resources and propose how the recommended budget should be allocated to each campus.


            ICAS Transfer Committee meeting, November 22, 2002

The ICAS Task Force on Transfer was established to provide a forum for faculty members from the three segments to discuss openly various issues impacting transfer between and among the public institutions of higher education.  Transfer has been and continues to be a serious concern of various legislators and there is a real threat of legislative action if faculty and the segments do not demonstrate serious progress toward smoother and increased transfer.  The group reviewed the charge of the ICC Transfer Committee and discussed ways in which our group could work jointly with this group.  There was also a review of the various statewide transfer and articulation initiatives, projects, and consultation groups including IMPAC, the CSU Core Projects, the UC Dual Admissions program, CAN, and the 4CSU effort.  CSU representatives expressed serious concern about recent actions by the Assembly of the CCC that opposed such an effort. The Task Force agreed to meet again in February before the next ICAS meeting. Consideration will be given at the next meeting to the idea of a Transfer Associate's degree and the key factors it represents.


Intersegmental Council of Academic Senates (ICAS), November 22, 2002

After an update on the ICC Retreat from the ICAS Chair Jackie Kegley, each segment Senate Chair presented reports.  Hoke Simpson, Chair of CCC, discussed a recent report on diversity that focuses on successful models for promoting diversity among faculty and students as well as in the curriculum.  He also discussed a report that sought to project the real cost of education for a community college student.  In addition, he reported on funding available for the ESL project and on two recent transfer degree projects in math and English.  Larry Pitts, Vice Chair, Academic Council, UC, reported that a new statement on Academic Freedom is being developed in light of the recent controversy over a course on Palestine at Berkeley.  BOARS is also undertaking a comprehensive review of diversity in the UC as well as of graduate admissions.  There will also be a gender equity summit held in the near future.  Finally, Larry Pitts reported that UC Merced has hired its first fifteen faculty members to begin development of the curriculum for that campus.  Chair Kegley reported for CSU on our resolution on 60 units for transfer as well as on the upcoming reports on Facilitating Graduation, Intellectual Property, Workload, and the Roles and Responsibilities of Chairs.


A progress report and a financial report were given on the IMPAC project.  John Tarjan's proposal for an Intersegmental Business Articulation Council was approved.  Each segment Senate Chair will contact and appoint members for this council.  Mary Gil and Jose Michal gave a presentation on the proposed new CAN articulation model.  The senates of each segment will be asked to review this and provide feedback and/or approval.  At the request of Hoke Simpson, Jackie Kegley reported on the ACR 73 Proposal and especially on the specific plans to meet the 75/25 ratio.  The final report of the ICAS ESL Scoping Committee was received and approved as well as a proposed charge for a Task Force on English Language Learners.  Each segment will nominate four faculty members (one from English composition) to be on this Competency Task Force.  It was agreed that the next meeting of ICAS would focus on legislative-Master Plan issues and budgetary consultation processes.


California State Student Association, (CSSA), December 6-8, 2002

The students had a good discussion of the ACR-73 Plan, the Intellectual Property Report, and the Facilitating Graduation Task Report.  In addition, there was an extensive discussion of the proposed Board of Trustees' resolution to increase undergraduate fees by 10% and graduate fees by 15%. 


Workload Task Force Meeting- December 14, 2002

The updated version of the comparable faculty workload report was reviewed and approved, followed by a discussion of the draft "Findings and Recommendations" document. Recommendations divided into four categories: Workload, Faculty Evaluation and Other Reward Processes, Research and Scholarly Activities and Lecturer Issues. 



Academic Technology Planning Committee Retreat (ATPC), January 7-9

The first task of this group was to review and validate a Vision statement, a set of project goals, planning assumptions, strategic criteria and tactical criteria.  The group then heard a report of the Academic Technology Planning Focus Groups held on seven campuses.  Through varied small group work, a set of draft initiatives were developed that will serve as a guide for possible projects in academic technology for the system as well as a stimulus to suggestions for initiative focus from campuses as the remaining campus visits take place in February. Members of the ATPC will be assisting in facilitating meetings on the campuses.


Meeting with Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Academic Officer David Spence, January 13, 2003

The meeting was to discuss the Governor's proposed budget for 2003-2004 as well as the Facilitating Graduation Report, transfer issues, and the Joint-Doctoral Review Panel. A strong goal for the CSU of both the Trustees and the Legislature is the providing of clear and facilitated pathways to graduation for all students, including transfer students.  Fortunately, the CSU in conjunction with the Academic Senate CSU has been working hard on this goal with its Common Core Projects, the Early Math and English Assessment project, and the recent report on Facilitating Graduation. 





Vice Chair David Hood introduced the Findings and Recommendations of the Advisory Committee for the CSU and Comparable Faculty Workload Studies.  Richard Serpe gave the Senate an overview of the studies and the highlights of the advisory committee's recommendations. 


The first study, completed in February 2002, looked at the workload of the faculty at the CSU, while the second study, completed in December 2002, compared the CSU including temporary faculty with comparable institutions throughout the country.  The studies attempted to replicate the one conducted in the last decade at CSU and throughout the United States in an effort to identify differences and trends.  The study found that CSU faculty work hard--in fact, they put in more hours than do their counterparts across the nation.  In fact, the CSU faculty teach an average of one more course per academic year than their counterparts in other universities.  The study also found that CSU tenured and probationary faculty are less positive about their working conditions and relationships at their institutions than their counterparts.  In addition, one-third of the tenured and probationary CSU faculty believe that effective teaching is not rewarded at their institution, which suggests a misalignment of rewards and expectations at the CSU. The study further found that CSU faculty are more likely to engage in the kinds of educational practices that enhance student learning than their national counterparts.


The workload study makes recommendations based on the findings of this study.  These are but a few of the recommendations.  Since the heavy teaching load has a major impact on faculty recruitment, the Trustees should work to align teaching loads so they are competitive, and the Trustees and campuses should provide models for flexible workloads.   The report also recommends that models for assessing effective teaching be provided, and that the standards and criteria for faculty evaluation be clarified.  Scholarly and creative activities should be supported, and there must be attention given to the working conditions, compensation, evaluation and appointments of lecturers.





Assistant Vice Chancellor Yelverton-Zamarripa met with the Senate to discuss Sacramento politics and policymaking, not just the budget.


Politics, she said is strongly colored by the term limits of the legislature.  It is the context for how the politicians position themselves.   In addition, nobody, including the Governor himself, expected that his election would be that close.  People are nervous about the economy, their futures, and their ability to take care of their families.  There was low voter turnout.  When the public think about education, they think K-12.  All constitutional officers are now Democrats; four politicians are interesting in becoming Governor in the next election.   The game is now politics not policy-making.  This fact affects how our elected officials work together and collaborate.  Older white voters regularly vote. Underrepresented groups are very much underrepresented in the polling booth.


Most of the political veterans will be gone after 2004.  The history and value of our system (the core of who we are) in the legislature will soon disappear.  We can expect to see pressure from K-12 regarding proposition 98, with many full time advertisements not to cut funds to  K-12 schools.  She also expects another bond issue in 2004, pressure for high speed rail, issues around water, and moves to strengthen the Gann limit.  In addition, for us, the legislature will be considering fee issues, privacy, and the use of Social Security numbers.  Several bills that have already been introduced including ones dealing with accountability, governance, CPEC, and K-12.


Next week the Board of Trustees will consider:





Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Academic Officer Spence began by telling the Senate that we need to make a concerted effort to graduate more of our students and a higher percentage of our students.   Although our graduation rates are comparable to other institutions in the nation, of students who come to us as first time freshman, 40% of them do not graduate.  He sees this as a waste of human and financial resources.  The Baccalaureate degree has become the "coin of the realm" for such things as jobs and social mobility.   Dr. Spence believes that we need to look at graduating our students with fewer accrued units.  He stated that the average number of units that students have upon graduation is over 144.  He said that cutting this will free up both space and time for more students. It would be a better use of state resources.  We need to provide students the clearest, straightest, most direct path to the degree.


The Vice Chancellor noted that the Facilitating Graduation Report  recommends a "degree audit," a process that would be triggered when a student has accrued 65 units.  This would be to see if the student is on a path to a degree. Dr. Spence emphasized that we are not looking at surcharges.  He believes that we need some kind of system policy for students who continue to repeat courses.  There is no consistent practice across the system.   We must also improve the transfer process.  The goal, he said, is for a community college transfer student to come to us with only 60 units have only to take an additional 64 units at a CSU to get a degree.


Regarding college preparation, Executive Vice Chancellor and Chief Academic Officer Spence said that the good news is that,though in 1998 only 32 % of the students came to us prepared in Math and English, that figure has now risen to 49%.  Math preparedness went up from 54% to 63%.   The bad news is that the ability to read critically has gone down.  Language arts preparedness went from 54% to 51%.  We must work with language arts teachers in the lower schools in helping them teach students to read critically. 




The committee put forth three nominees for the Senate to consider sending to the Governor as candidates for the Faculty Trustee position. These are:

            Gene L. Dinielli, CSU Long Beach

            Kathleen E. Kaiser, CSU Chico

            Jacquelyn A. Kegley, CSU Bakersfield

During its plenary in March, the Senate will consider which names to send forward to the Governor for his selection and appointment to the Board.








Don Chu and Sally Veregge presented the reports of the Task force on Roles and Responsibilities of Chairs to the Senate.  The data they presented was from The California State University Department Chair Survey Report that underlies?? the Task Force's findings. The recommendations of the Task Force are contained in their Recommendations for Best Practices for Roles, Responsibilities, Resources, and Rewards for Department Chairs.


The survey was conducted through the Senate offices on the campuses with a total of 425 responses returned (50%).  The survey looked at four primary questions.  "Who are the California State University (CSU) Department Chairs? What are the conditions under which they work? What do they do, and how much time does it take? Lastly, why do they serve, and why don't they want to serve longer?"


In short, the study found that chairs are mostly "home grown."  While wide campus differences exist, over two-thirds of all chairs have had no formal preparation before assuming their duties. Chairs reported that they have not been given clear performance expectations.  Between 61%-80% of a chair's day is spent on administrative duties.  And the report concludes that: "The bureaucratic grind of paperwork, reports and meetings seems to wear chairs down."


The Task Force drew its recommendations from the survey.  The Task Force recommended, in part that:




According to the Bylaws of the Senate, it was necessary to fill Senator Charnofsky's position on the Executive Committee by an election at this meeting.  The Senate elected Robert W. Cherny, San Francisco State University, to serve on the Executive Committee for the remainder of this academic year.





The Senate passed the following six items:


1. Hal Charnofsy, Distinguished Senator and Beloved Colleague

This resolution bestowed the title of Distinguished Senator and Beloved Colleague on Harold "Hal" Charnofsky, a member of the Academic Senate CSU for the past 25 years, and a faculty member at CSU Dominguez Hills since 1966.  He served on every standing committee of the Academic Senate including several terms on the Executive Committee.  He chaired the Academic Affairs Committee, the Faculty Affairs Committee, and the Merit Pay Task Force, and co-chaired the board of the Institute on Teaching and Learning.  CSU Dominguez Hills named him Distinguished Teacher in 1990, and the CSU Board of Trustees gave him its Outstanding Professor Award in 1992.  Professor Charnofsky passed away December 21, 2002.  His collegial support and generous nature will be sorely missed.


2. Whistleblower Protection

This resolution calls upon campus academic senates to work with their local administrations to review, develop, and approve campus policies on "whistle blower" protection.  These policies should be consistent with the provisions of Section 8547.23(c) of the government Code, a part of the California Whistleblower Protection Act, as applied to the CSU by Chancellor's Executive Orders 821 and 822 of May 23, 2002.  The resolution also calls upon the campus administrations to designate an individual on each campus to receive such complaints and evaluate compliance with the order.  This resolution further calls upon campus senates to work with their local administrations to education faculty and staff about the provisions of both the Executive Orders and campus policy.


3. Apportionment of Senate Seats

This resolution creates a ninth Bylaw, on  the apportionment of Senate Seats.  It charges the Executive Committee with recommending the apportionment and reapportionment of Senate seats using the formula in Article II, Section 1, of the Senate's constitution.  The seats will be determined based on Fall FTEF data, and the Executive Committee will present their recommendation to the Senate for its approval at its first meeting in the calendar year. When new seats are added to the senate, they will be filled in the next spring election cycle.  When a campus loses a seat, the seat lost would be the first seat to complete its three-year term following the announcement of the reapportionment, and would not be lost until that three-year term expires.  This bylaw gives the Senate a procedure for implementing the new constitutional amendment and for keeping apportionment up to date.


The Senate instructed the Executive Committee to recommend (during this Senate meeting) changes that would take place for the Academic Year 2003-2004.  The Senate approved the recommendation of the Executive Committee that increases representation by one senator for the campuses of San Luis Obispo, Fresno, Los Angeles, Pomona, Chico, and the Maritime Academy.  It also allocates two senators to the new campus at Channel Islands. 


4. Opposition to a Decrease in CSU Funding Tied to an Increase in Student Faculty Ratio   

This resolution urges the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees, in negotiating the budget for the 2003-2004 fiscal year, to oppose any decrease in the CSU budget tied to an increase in the student faculty ratio (SFR).  The Senate believes that increasing SFR would have a direct, long-term impact on the quality of instruction, and that the CSU should not institute permanent, structural changes to manage short-term financial difficulties.


5. Program Suspension/Discontinuation/Dissolution

This resolution urges campus senates to review, or develop as appropriate, policy recommendations regarding processes and guidelines related to the suspension, discontinuation, or dissolution of academic programs or academic departments.  The resolution further calls for campus senates to ensure that their policies explicitly address employment options for the affected tenured and probationary faculty and permanent staff.  The resolution also lists principles for the campus senates to take into consideration as they modify or develop their policy recommendations. 


6. Affirming the Role of Faculty in Development and Placement of Curricula in the California State University System         

This resolution reaffirms the basic principles articulated in Principles and Policies: Papers of the Academic Senate CSU about the primary role of faculty development of academic programs, course development, and recruitment decisions affecting curriculum.  The resolution further urges all campus presidents and other academic administrators to develop the widest possible consultation process for the creation, funding, placement and implementation of new academic programs, courses, or other curricular changes. 



The Senate moved, as first reading items, the following two resolutions: [Note:  These items are being sent out to campus senates for discussion. These items will come up for a vote as second reading items during the Senate's Plenary, March 6-7, 2003.]


1. Student Fees in the CSU; Mitigating Their Effects

This resolution reluctantly supports the decision of the CSU Board of Trustees to implement mid-year student fee increases as one means of protecting the existing range and quality of the curriculum.  The resolution further states that fee increases in the CSU should be implemented in a way that would do the least harm possible to students' access to high education.  The resolution supports the principle that with fee increases there must be sufficient financial aid to cover the additional need created by the fee, and that funds must be provided for the maintenance and expansion of programs designed to educate current and potential students about the availability of financial aid and the procedures for obtaining it.  The resolution further states that revenues raised by additional student fees should remain within the system to support instructional programs on the campuses.  


2. Campus Policies on Privacy of Electronic Communication

This resolution reaffirms its support for privacy in communication, including electronic communication among students, staff, faculty, and others as enumerated in our previous resolution.  This previous resolution outlines the policy whereby all e-mail accounts are considered confidential, except where these accounts must be accessed for technical problem resolution, when required by state or federal law, when there is probable cause to suspect illegal activity, or for discovery in civil litigation.  The resolution further endorses the privacy provisions of paragraph nine of the American Association of University Professors' statement on Academic Freedom and Electronic Communication, and urges campus senates to insure adequate privacy protections consistent with these statements. 


3. Task Force on Roles and Responsibilities of Chairs

This resolution recommends that campus senates review the findings and recommendations from the document titled Roles, Responsibilities, Resources, and Rewards for Department Chairs, and the campus-specific information in the task force reports, to facilitate campus-based discussions among administrators and chairs to resolve relevant issues innumerated in these reports.  The resolution also recommends that the chancellor's office review the findings and recommendations of the task force and work with the Academic Senate CSU to develop systemwide policy recommendations as appropriate. 


4. Recommendation in Support of the New California Articulation Number (CAN) Model


This resolution strongly endorses the draft of the new articulation model, with the following qualification:

      That, regarding validation of CAN courses, the CAN System solicit both lead faculty and discipline review faculty through the academic senates of the participating systems.

The resolution further encourages the CAN Board to continue its effort to develop web-based CAN descriptor templates, and to extend the CAN process to elective courses recommended for preparation within a major.


5. Recommendation on the Report from Joint Provost/Academic Senate California State University Task Force on Facilitating Graduation: Facilitating Student Success in Achieving the Baccalaureate Degree

This resolution endorses the principles and recommendations of the Joint Provost/Academic Senate California State University Task Force on Facilitating Graduation subject to the following?? stipulations:

      That the Chancellor's Office and the Academic Senate CSU consult on what further research, if any should be undertaken, and that any additional policy options should be developed through ongoing consultation with the Academic Senate CSU and the campus senates; and

      That the individual campuses, through the shared governance process, retain autonomy in their efforts to design institutionally tailored programs guided by the principles and recommendations in this report.


6. Campus Budget Consultation as a Criterion for Presidential Evaluation

This resolution strongly urges the Board of Trustees to include "Regular consultation with campus academic senates on matters of budget planning" as one of the specific criteria to be contained in The California State University Criteria for Presidential Assessment.  By making consultation with faculty through the shared governance process on matters of budget planning a formal criterion of presidential evaluation, the Board of Trustees would emphasize in a concrete manner the importance of such consultation and increase the likelihood that it will occur in a meaningful way on the individual CSU campuses.