UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA CRUZ

AS/SCM267

M I N U T E S

A Regular Meeting of the Santa Cruz Division

October 24, 2001

Meeting

A regular meeting of the Santa Cruz Division of the Academic Senate was held Wednesday, October 24, 2001 in Kresge Town Hall. With Secretary David Belanger present, Chair George Blumenthal called the meeting to order at 3:07 p.m.

Chair Blumenthal requested to move Item number 8, the GSA President Report, after Item 3. The motion was made by Professor Frank Talamantes, seconded and adopted by a voice vote.

1. Approval of Minutes

Chair Blumenthal asked if there were any corrections to the minutes from the meeting of May 30, 2001. A motion to approve the meeting minutes, with the corrections proposed by Professors Joel Yellin and Bob Meister, was made and seconded. The minutes were approved by a voice vote.

2. Announcements

a) Chair Blumenthal

Chair Blumenthal welcomed all to the first Senate meeting of the academic year. Chair Blumenthal reported on two system-wide proposals regarding the UC admissions policy. The first proposal, originating with President Atkinson, is to eliminate the SAT I exam as one of the factors that determine eligibility for admission to UC. The second proposal is for a comprehensive review, which would replace the Tier I/Tier II system currently in use for determining admissions to a given campus with a new set of criteria. It would be used comprehensively, or holistically, to determine admissions. These two proposals are very different and it was emphasized that they do two different things. The SAT I proposal has to do with UC eligibility; the comprehensive review has to do with which UC eligible students are admitted to a campus which is oversubscribed with applications. Both of these issues were put on the agenda of the Senate over the summer. BOARS (Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools) has worked very hard and Karen McNally, the UCSC BOARS representative, will give a report later in the meeting. Chair Blumenthal reiterated that comprehensive review has nothing to do with UC eligibility; it has only to do with the question of who among the UC eligible students will be admitted to a particular campus. The Academic Council approved comprehensive review and, if passed by the Academic Assembly, it will be on the agenda for the Regents meeting in November. If comprehensive review passes, UCSC will need to develop a set of criteria to admit UC eligible students. Comprehensive review is not only about how we admit students, but also about the Senate regaining control of the admissions process.

Chair Blumenthal reported on a proposal by the California State University that the CSUs offer the Ed.D. degree as a way of preparing K-12 administrators and teachers. CSU is specifically excluded from awarding doctoral degrees by the Master Plan for Higher Education in California. UC is the only public entity permitted to offer doctoral degrees. In response to this unprecedented proposal, UC campuses have been encouraged to pursue development of the Ed.D degree. The President of the University of California and the President of CSU have begun negotiations about the possibility of offering joint Ed.D. degrees.

In approving the budget for the University of California, the Governor did not provide the funding associated with the partnership agreement between the State and the UC. He did include funding for new student enrollments. As a result, there are insufficient funds within the university budget to pay for cost-of-living increases for faculty and staff. The system-wide administration will request in next year's budget two cost-of-living increases: what we should have gotten this year and what we should get next year. There is also a proposal which will go to the Regents in November to establish a capital accumulation provision. This would take the money that was not given to faculty and staff this year from the retirement system and put it into a retirement account. This proposal shows some good faith effort to compensate both faculty and staff.

The contract between the University of California and the Department of Energy labs will soon be up for renewal. It is anticipated that there will be considerable discussion this year regarding this contract.

Chair Blumenthal introduced the names and welcomed the new faculty that joined UCSC this year. As there was a fair number of new faculty, a handout was distributed at the meeting with all the names of the new faculty members.

Chair Blumenthal has scheduled six Senate meetings this year. He is encouraging Senate committees to present reports of their ongoing business on a regular basis to the Senate. This way the Senate as a whole can have more input into that business.

It is suggested that the Senate think about some changes that might be made to the bylaws of our local Divisional Academic Senate. UCSC bylaws may not be consistent with system-wide bylaws. The bylaws of the Santa Cruz Division were written in the mid-60's. UCSC may want to think about how the Senate can adapt some of the changes made to the campus over the course of the last 35 years. Chair Blumenthal mentioned the possibility of considering a representative Assembly.

There has been some controversy regarding the charge to the NES Student Grievance Committee. Chair Blumenthal has asked the Rules, Jurisdiction, and Elections Committee to provide a finding on the legality of that committee. He has also asked the Chair of the NES Student Grievance Committee to provide the Senate with information about the operation of the committee. Chair Blumenthal intends to ask several Senate committees to consider possible changes to the way grade appeals are handled.

Chair Blumenthal endorsed the idea of reconstituting the Professors' Inaugural Lecture series in some modified way. This is a series of lectures given by faculty when they are elevated to the position of full professor on this campus. It is his hope that the Senate will have the opportunity to sponsor these lectures again.

The Senate needs to consider how it might better utilize electronic communications in the operations of the Senate. There were marked improvements to the Santa Cruz Senate website over the summer. It is hoped that we will move to better and increased usage of the web. An example of this would be the ability to apply for COR grants on the web. Perhaps the Senate could also eventually conduct voting on the web.

b) Chancellor Greenwood

Chancellor Greenwood thanked Chair Blumenthal for his coverage of the many issues that the University is facing, both at the state and local level. She welcomed both new and returning faculty. She encouraged all to attend the strolling dinner to meet the new faculty, honor Bernie LaBoeuf for the work he did as the Interim Vice Chancellor for Research, and meet the new Vice Chancellor of Research, Bob Miller.

The budget environment in the State of California and the federal budget climate are changing in ways that are extremely difficult to predict. UCSC is positioned well with our planning process and will be able to address either budget exigencies or budget growth.

UCSC has done a remarkable job dealing with the events of September 11, 2001. There were the hour of reflection in the Music Recital Hall and a student-led candlelight vigil in the quarry. There have also been a number of faculty-led forums and seminars, as well as interaction with groups around town. The community has been impressed with the quality of the faculty response. This provides UCSC with an opportunity to show our local community and the surrounding regional area the value of having a research university in their midst.

This is the beginning of Chancellor Greenwood's sixth year at UCSC. During the past four years we have accomplished about 60% of the growth we were expecting. We will complete about $420 million worth of construction on this campus, making this one of the most intensely physically planned parts of our history. UCSC is clearly becoming an institution more interesting to some of the best students in the state. There has been an increase in Regent scholars and transfer students. We may be headed to selectivity, which will have both upsides and downsides. UCSC has also attracted high-quality, young faculty and several full professors from across the country. Chancellor Greenwood thanked the 35 search committees that assisted in selecting those faculty members.

We are in the process of reshaping our use of resources so we can maximize support of students. The State no longer gives its public research universities the kind of resources it did 35 years ago. In addition to our commitment to undergraduate education, Chancellor Greenwood stated that she would like to see UCSC focus on research during the next five years. Very specific goals will need to be set in order to accomplish this. The first goal is to focus on graduate education by increasing the percentage of high-quality graduate students, doubling the number of Ph.D. students over the next five years. In order to provide support for graduate students, deans and faculty will be asked to help obtain more training grants, try to find private donors, and find other ways to finance graduate education. Graduate students must proactively apply for available resources and fellowships. Due to the uncertainty of the current budget situation in the State of California, the report from the Regent's Commission on Graduate Education may be held back. California is the last among the 15 largest states in the growth of graduate education in the last decade. In the last 30 years, undergraduate education has grown by over one hundred percent, but graduate education in our state has only grown by seven percent. UCSC is on the lower side of comparably sized research universities in overall numbers of graduate students.

The Governor sent a letter to President Atkinson asking what the University of California could do to support the changing state needs in security: economic security as well as biological warfare security. President Atkinson responded by listing all the areas in which the University of California has the research expertise to support the state in helping to understand and move forward in a new era. These range from economic experts to experts on medical issues, psychological stress, and cultural differences.

Chancellor Greenwood has asked the new Vice Chancellor for Research Bob Miller to put together a plan to double our research income over the next five to seven years. She has also directed the Vice Chancellor for University Relations, Ron Suduiko, to begin putting together a major coordinated campaign to set a target for a substantial amount of money to be raised privately over the next five years. UCSC needs to create a culture of philanthropy. Chancellor Greenwood thanked the faculty that give both their time and money to the University.

The new model for this research university is to be relatively small, diverse, excellent in disciplines, but with a multi-disciplinary approach to larger social challenges. Chancellor Greenwood believes this campus is unique among public research institutions in our ability to bridge across fields, whether they are sciences, social sciences, arts, humanities, or engineering.

Much of the state revenue during the last five years came from sources such as capital gains. Permanent expenditures were based on these temporary revenues which have now dried up. The Governor has issued two Executive Orders. One requires a hiring freeze on all state agencies and the other requires a holdback on contracts and commitments in an attempt to save at least $150 million within state agencies.

Professor Dilip Basu commented that the current crisis is not just in the Middle East, but also in South Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh. The administration needs to take into consideration students and faculty of South Asian origin when speaking about the tragedy that occurred on September 11, 2001 and specifically include them in campus activities. Chair Blumenthal stated that we must affirm our support, our willingness to protect, and our interest in our faculty and students.

Professor Margo Hendricks asked if the Chancellor has met with African-American students, as they are very concerned about fliers that were circulated and other racial incidents on campus. Chancellor Greenwood has met with them and will continue to meet with them and a variety of different groups on campus to address these issues.

c) Campus Provost/EVC Simpson

With the changes in the state budget, the context of the campus ten-year planning process has changed. The campus planning process is more critical than ever because when the state budget improves, UCSC must be prepared to take advantage of opportunities. In the meantime, the budget situation requires that we look carefully at current operations. The state budget makes up approximately 40% of UCSC's budget. It is a substantial proportion and it is the primary underpinning of the research and instructional infrastructure. It would be a strategic error to have the planning process come to a standstill as a result of the downturn in the state's economy. The present situation requires us to think carefully and think critically about all that we do, how we can do it better, how we can do it differently, and how we can improve.

UCSC does have control over two areas of revenues: federal support for research and private funding. It is necessary to increase activity in both areas. Chancellor Greenwood and EVC Simpson will present a Draft Campus Plan for campus-wide consideration and discussion next spring. It will consider the campus, academic planning programs, academic support programs, aspects of infrastructure, and a revenue plan. UCSC is contemplating its first major and comprehensive major-capital campaign. A process is going forward which will result in a master plan for the campus's physical makeup for the future. There are considerable issues with information technology infrastructure that need to be addressed. There are also issues associated with start-up-funds, admissions and enrollment management, and housing for faculty, staff and students. The Senate and the Administration will look at these issues in combination toward successful problem solving.

3. Report of the Representative to the Assembly (none)

8. Report of the Graduate Student Association President

Lee Ritscher, President of the Graduate Student Association reported on the opening of the Graduate Commons. The GSA is focusing on several issues, including the many problems faced by international graduate students, the need for career counseling and psychological services geared toward graduate student needs, summer funding for graduate students in all disciplines, and the pervasive problem of affordable housing. As UCSC wishes to support graduate education and the development of graduate programs, increase graduate retention, and enhance graduate student recruitment, the immediate implementation of a graduate college could alleviate some of these needs of current graduate students and enhance our ability to draw future graduate students to our campus. UCSC has shown an uncommon commitment to the well-being and social development of its students primarily by means of a college system; however, graduate students have rarely enjoyed the same benefits conferred by a college, as do undergraduates. President Ritscher encouraged the Academic Senate to consider the plan for a graduate college as a means to making this UC campus more attractive to prospective graduate students and as a means of solving problems of current graduate students.

4. Special Orders: Annual Reports

a) Committee on Academic Freedom: (AS/SCP/1321)

Former CAF Chair Joel Yellin presented the annual report.

The report considers whether the UCSC procedure for appeals of grade is consistent with due process for faculty. There is considerable disagreement among the faculty regarding this issue. The point at issue is whether UCSC should adopt procedures that explicitly recognize that a change of grade contrary to the judgment of the instructor requires a finding that the grades were given on non-academic grounds, which is a violation of the Code of Conduct. The opposing view is that a Senate Review Committee may order a change in a student's grade if it is decided that the instructor's standards are too stringent. Procedures used on other UC campuses are not consistent with one another. The position of the Academic Freedom Committee is that the University Committee on Rules and Jurisdiction should now decide this question.

The committee remains concerned about the proposed revisions for Senate Bylaw 335. Under the new procedures it is possible to carry out a process that ends in the discharge of a tenured faculty member because that faculty's teaching is unacceptable, specifically excluding any consideration of the substance of what that faculty member teaches. The issues are summarized in a letter from CAF appended to the report.

The report raises concerns about the principles and ethics of the University's collection of charitable contributions. Several faculty members have felt they have been improperly pressured by staff to contribute to the United Way. That faculty and staff are presently given a single choice of organizations to which they might contribute is problematic.

The report also includes the committee's comments on the "Principles of Community".

The report was received without comment.

b) Committee on Admissions and Financial Aid (AS/SCP/1323)

CAFA Chair John Tamkun presented the annual report and introduced the new Executive Director of Admissions and University Registrar, Kevin Browne. The report was received without comment.

c) Committee on Affirmative Action (AS/SCP/1324)

Professor Joel Yellin raised a point of order that this report is improperly signed by individuals who have no vote. He asked that this be corrected or that the report be withdrawn. Chair Blumenthal ruled that the report will stand.

CAA Chair Judy Yung presented the annual report. This year CAA followed up on the Senate resolution passed last year affirming the campus commitment to advance diversity through excellence. CAF found that many of the long-range plans lack expression of a strategy for promoting diversity. CAA will be reviewing all the proposals for the diversity fund program established by EVC Simpson. The report also includes the results of exit interviews, which show that the reasons faculty are leaving UCSC include: spousal-hiring issues; housing issues; and better offers from other universities. CAA would like to work more closely with the following Senate Committees: the Graduate Council to try to increase diversity in the academic pipeline; CAP to reward faculty or acknowledge their diversity efforts in review cases; and CEP to continue diversifying the curriculum. The report was received without comment.

d) Committee on Computing and Telecommunications: (AS/SCP/1325)

CCT Chair Charles McDowell presented the annual report and reminded the Senate that there is central funding available for faculty to receive workstation upgrades. The report was received without comment.

e) Committee on Educational Policy: (AS/SCP/1319)

Professor Joel Yellin made a point of order that there are improper signatures, that of the Provost Representative and two non-voting student representatives, and the report is therefore out of order. He submitted in writing the following:

RR10thED p. 485

"...a report of a...committee can contain only what has been agreed to by a majority vote at a regular or properly called meeting...where every member...was notified...,and a quorum...was present."

"...if it is impractical to bring its members together for a meeting, the report of the committee can contain what has been agreed to by every one of its members."

ibid. p. 495

"If a written committee report is of considerable importance, it should be signed by everyone concurring. Otherwise, the committee can authorize its chairman to sign the report alone,..."

ibid. p.512

"If a written report of a committee is signed by all who concur and a committee member is in agreement with a report except in one particular, he can...add a statement that he concurs with the report except the part he specifies, and then sign the statement."

Committee on Educational Policy.... SCB13.4.1...All voting members of all committees must be members of the Santa Cruz Division. Students who sit with Standing Committees as provided in these Bylaws are non-voting representatives...."

13.17.1 There are six Santa Cruz Division members. The Registrar serves ex officio. One non-voting provosts' representative selected by the Council of Provosts, and no more than two student representatives shall be invited to sit with the Committee."

Chair Blumenthal ruled that the committee report will stand as written. Names at the end of the report will be interpreted not as signatures but as a roster of all members, including student members. The Senate has no power to change the words of a committee report.

Professor Yellin then made a point of inquiry regarding the situation in which a committee member disagrees with something that a committee has done. Chair Blumenthal responded that they can submit a minority report.

Responding to a question from the floor whether CEP considered the ramifications of the change in the adoption of letter grades on the exit requirements, CEP Chair Carol Freeman responded that the committee did not consider this last year but have since received several requests to do so and are now in the process of considering that regulation. The committee is gathering information and asks departments to send opinions on this matter to CEP for consideration.

f) Committee on Faculty Welfare: (AS/SCP/1327)

CFW Chair Mark Traugott presented the annual report which was received without comment.

g) Graduate Council: (AS/SCP/1316)

Former GC Chair Phokion Kolaitis presented the annual report which was received without comment.

h) Committee on Privilege and Tenure: (AS/SCP/1330)

In order to respond to a question from the floor regarding the annual report written when he was P&T Chair, Chair Blumenthal temporarily relinquished the Chair to Senate Vice Chair, Alison Galloway.

Professor Joel Yellin questioned the report's assertion that UCSC procedures for grade appeals bear a strong similarity to the procedures used on most, but not all other campuses. Former P&T Chair Blumenthal stated that many other campuses do use a procedure similar to the one UCSC uses.

i) Committee on Teaching: (AS/SCP/1317)

COT Chair Bruce Cooperstein presented the annual report which was received without comment.

5. Reports of Special Committees

a) Special Committee on Merit Equity Review (AS/SCP/1328)

CMER Chair Mary Silver presented the report and reported that there will be a workshop for Senate members to provide input on the draft process for Merit Equity Review. The report was received without comment.

6. Reports of Standing Committees

a. Committee on Committees: Nominations 2001-02 (AS/SCP/1329)

COC Chair Shelly Errington asked for the Senate's approval of the nominations as printed in the CALL. These nominations, having been moved by a committee, did not require a second. Professor Joel Yellin questioned why there is no representative from the School of Engineering on the Admissions Committee. Chair Errington responded by stating that it will be proposed at the next Senate meeting that CAFA be increased by as many as two members. If passed, COC will attempt to find an Engineering representative.

The nominations were approved by voice vote.

b. Committee on Educational Policy: Advisory Guidelines on Writing Performance (Narrative) Evaluations (AS/SCP/1320)

CEP Chair Carol Freeman submitted the Advisory Guidelines on Writing Undergraduate Performance (Narrative) Evaluations. Professor Joel Yellin asked that the references to the regulations in Chapter 16, which pertain to the Graduate Council be stricken from the report. Professor Carol Freeman had no objection to this request. Chris Amico, on behalf of the Student Union assembly, applauded the efforts of the faculty who worked to preserve narrative/written evaluations. We ask that faculty continue to write thorough evalutions. It was noted from the floor that if these evaluations are to be read by future employers that it is more professional to refer to the students as Mr. or Ms. with a surname rather than by first name.

c. Committee on Admissions and Financial Aid: Summer Review of UC Admissions Policies (AS/SCP/1331)

BOARS representative Karen McNally reported on the proposed changes in policies of admissions for the University of California. Two issues discussed over the summer are the dropping of the SAT I and the comprehensive review for admissions. In considering these, BOARS has reaffirmed the rights of the faculty to decide admissions policies. Every campus will establish its own admissions criteria that best suit that particular campus. At UCSC, the admissions office must be ready to implement a comprehensive, selective admissions process a year in advance of the campus becoming selective. UCSC is expected to become selective in 2003-04, which means we must decide now how we want to select our students.

Professor Dick Terdiman moved the following resolution:

THAT the Senate instructs CAFA to formulate a plan for establishing a campus-wide database for creating, tracking, comparing comprehensive admissions guidelines including grading statistics, scores on admissions tests required by the university, high school grades, and report to the divisional Senate on the status of this effort not later than February 1, 2002.

The motion was seconded.

Professor Joel Yellin submitted a friendly amendment which was accepted so that the motion read:

RESOLVED: That the Senate requests CAFA to formulate a plan for establishing a campus-wide database for creating, tracking, comparing comprehensive admissions guidelines including grading statistics, scores on admissions and placement tests required by the university, high school grades, and report to the divisional Senate on the status of this effort not later than February 1, 2002.

The floor was opened for discussion. Professor Roger Anderson inquired as to whether the committee will have any special resources with which to do the planning. Professor Karen McNally noted that funds will be necessary and they are tapping all possible sources including the Office of the President.

The resolution was passed by voice vote.

Professor Joel Yellin asked how it will be possible for parents, students, and guidance counselors to know how to prepare for the best chance of admission to the University with the introduction of comprehensive review and the elimination of Tier I, Tier II and Tier III. Professor Karen McNally stated that students should concentrate on solid pre-college courses in high school and getting the best grades. Professor Michael Cowan said it will be up to each campus to describe very clearly what criteria and process it will be using and make this information accessible to students who are applying.

d. Committee on Planning and Budget: Oral Report

CPB Chair Bob Meister reported that UCSC is experiencing almost all of the growth between 2000 and 2006 that was projected to take place over a 20-year period. The majority of this growth is occurring in the undergraduate component of our student body. This growth will change the ratio of undergraduates to graduates from 9.5 to 1 to approximately 14 to 1. The question CPB is addressing is whether or not the campus can exceed 12,500 undergraduates without precluding reaching a more appropriate and acceptable ratio of graduates to undergraduates. CPB will be looking at how to balance revenue if we do exceed undergraduate expectations. The three sources of revenue are enrollment funds, overhead generated by federal grants, and extramural funding. CPB will develop a metric for monitoring undergraduate education. It will also develop a model for determining the optimum level and rate of graduate student growth that will provide the right balance between graduate and undergraduate programs. CPB will need input from both the Graduate Council and CAFA before making any recommendations.

e. Graduate Council: Oral Report

GC Chair Quentin Williams emphasized the need to plan for our graduate growth. A primary agenda item for the Graduate Council this year is to determine the guidelines for proposals for interdisciplinary graduate groups. UCSC currently has only two new degree programs being evaluated by the University Coordinating Committee on Graduate Affairs. It is important that faculty put together proposals for new graduate programs and new interdisciplinary graduate programs now.

Chancellor Greenwood stated that there are several bills moving through Congress right now that would provide substantially more funding for graduate programs in areas of national need, ranging from technical areas to understanding other cultures. The Regents are now making a strong case that the State of California needs to build graduate programs.

Responding to a question from the floor, Chair Williams stated that growth in existing and new programs is envisioned. The magnitude of growth anticipated cannot, however, be accommodated only in existing programs.

7. Report of the Student Union Assembly

Leo Grandison, the external vice-chair of the Student Union Assembly, reported. The undergraduate student body is concerned about the following: the lack of affordable housing and the backlash and recent incidents of hate on our campus. The students would like the administration to consider the suggestions regarding admissions reform, comprehensive review, and evaluations. They would like to continue to build relations between the Academic Senate and the students. It is hoped that the Senate will solicit student input and participation. The SUA is committed to increasing awareness and access to information by students.

9. Petitions of Students: (none)

10. Unfinished Business: (none)

11. University and Faculty Welfare: (none)

12. New Business: (none)

The meeting was adjourned at 5:30 p.m.

ATTEST:

David Belanger

Secretary

December 19, 2001

Recording Secretary: Mary-Beth Harhen

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SANTA CRUZ - draft AS/SCM/

Minutes, Regular Meeting-October 24, 2001