Divisional Representatives|
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS ACADEMIC SENATE VOLUME XXX, No. 7 MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE REPRESENTATIVE ASSEMBLY OF THE DAVIS DIVISION OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE Wednesday, June 5, 2002 3:00 - 5:00 p.m. Memorial Union, MU II
A. Remarks by the Chair of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate B. Remarks by the Chair of the Academic Federation, Linda Hughes C. Remarks by the Chair of the Staff Assembly, Laura Townsley *D. Annual Report of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Responsibility *E. Annual Report of the Committee on Academic Planning and Budget Review *F. Annual Report of the Committee on Admissions and Enrollment *G. Annual Report of the Committee on Affirmative Action and Diversity H. Annual Report of the Committee on Committees *I. Annual Report of the Committee on Courses of Instruction J. Annual Report of the Committee on Distinguished Teaching Awards *K. Annual Report of the Committee on Educational Policy *L. Annual Report of the Committee on Emeriti/ae *M. Annual Report of the Executive Council *N. Annual Report of the Committee on Faculty Welfare *O. Annual Report of the Committee on Grade Changes *P. Annual Report of the Committee on International Studies and Exchanges *Q. Annual Report of the Committee on Preparatory Education *R. Annual Report of the Committee on Privilege and Tenure *S. Annual Report of the Committee on Public Service *T. Annual Report of the Committee on Research *U. Annual Report of the Committee on Student-Faculty Relationships 7. Reports of special committees A. Report of the Special Committee on Transportation and Parking
A. Report of the Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction concerning proposed amendments to the following Bylaws 64. (International Studies and Exchanges), 87. (Privilege and Tenure), 99. (Research) and 126. (Joint Personnel) B. Report of the Public Service Committee 9. Petitions of students - None
A. Proposed amendment to Davis Division Bylaw 137 regarding Chairs of Faculties 11. University and faculty welfare - None 12. New business A. Proposed new Davis Division Bylaw 121 regarding the Creation of an Undergraduate Council B. Proposal from the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools Regarding Standardized Testing in Undergraduate Admissions - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Chair Jeffery Gibeling began the meeting informally, a quorum having not yet been certified. He reported that there were no announcements by the President, Vice Presidents, Chief Campus Officer, Deans, Directors, or other Executive Officers. And, he said that due to the length of the agenda he would defer from making any remarks. 7.Special Orders B. Remarks by the Chair of the Academic Federation, Linda Hughes, Chair of the Academic Federation. Linda Hughes thanked Chair Gibeling for the opportunity to address the Assembly. She said the Academic Federation is a parallel organization to the Academic Senate in the way that it is structured and with the many disciplines of the campus being represented. She said Academic Federation, like the Senate, also serves the mission of the University with teaching, research, and service. She noted, for example, that the Professional Researchers focus on research, and lecturers focus on teaching. Other membership titles include Academic Coordinators, Cooperative Extension Specialists, Librarians and Agronomists. She said members of the Academic Federation support the work and efforts of the Senate and help make their work easier. She said this year the Federation has worked on several issues: a) implementation of a peer review process that provides a systematic approach to peer review for non-Senate academic titles b) professional leave option - a short-term type of leave analogous to a sabbatical leave but with a maximum of three months over a five year period. She noted three key points regarding the lecturers. 1) As professionals they should have peer review 2) Continuity as an aspect of quality teaching is a matter of academic importance and is an area of interest in faculty governance and 3) Because lecturers deliver considerable undergraduate instruction, it is important they be included in discussions concerning departmental curriculum planning/issues. Briefly, she also reported on an item of concern for the Federation. She said the Office of the President has proposed shifting all non-Senate academic appointees to one year contracts without regard to what their particular work is (except for Unit 18 folks, others under MOUs and Cooperative Extension folks). She added that currently with 30 days notice, AF titles can be removed from positions based on funding availability, programmatic changes or performance inadequacies. Under the new proposal, individuals could simply not be renewed (no notice required) if they have served less than 8 consecutive years in the same title/series. She said this could impact Senate faculty by impacting the colleagues they work with, and that she hoped the Senate will look at this issue closely. C. Remarks by the Chair of the Staff Assembly, Laura Townsley A summary of her remarks follow: The Staff Assembly tries to be the voice of the staff. This year, the Staff Assembly co-sponsored the Benefits and Wellness Fair and also the 8th District candidate's forum. Staff Assembly's voice has also been heard regarding the parking issue and staff are represented on various campus committee such as the Campus Community Diversity Committee. TGFS week and specifically the TGFS barbecue were very successful. The Staff Assembly has a web-site and a newsletter as communication vehicles. In closing, she said she would be completing her term as Chair of the Staff Assembly at the end of June and that her successor would be elected soon. Chair Gibeling reported that a quorum had been certified and officially called the meeting to order. A roster of members present and absent is attached as Appendix I to these Minutes. He noted the reports on the Consent Calendar, those indicated with an asterisk. In addition, he said the Annual Reports of the Library Committee and the Teaching Committee were distributed at the door and he would like them to also be included on the Consent Calendar. (A copy of these reports is attached as Appendix II to these Minutes.) He asked if any member of the Representative Assembly wished to remove any of the reports. A member suggested removing the Annual Report of the Research Committee since it appears from the Meeting Call that it is an oral report. No other reports were requested to be removed from the Consent Calendar and therefore will be noted as having been received and placed on file. 1. Minutes of the May 6, 2002 meeting - Hearing no corrections to the Minutes, they were noted as having been approved by consent. 6. Special orders H. Annual Report of the Committee on Committees - Jessica Utts, Chair, presented the Annual Report of the Committee on Committees. She reported the Divisional Officers for 2002-2003: Jeffery C. Gibeling, Chair; Judith S. Stern, Vice Chair; and Kyaw Tha Paw U, Secretary. She reported two additional appointments: Michele Praeger, Chair, Affirmative Action and Diversity Committee and Steffi San Buenaventura, member, Undergraduate Scholarships, Honors and Prizes. She then moved confirmation of the 2002-2003 appointments to standing committees appearing on pages 23-25 of the meeting call. The motion was approved. T. Annual Report of the Committee on Research - Roger McDonald, Chair, presented the report of the Committee on Research. He announced that there was an unfortunate error in the email list, hence the call for applications for Faculty Research Grants resulted in not everyone receiving the call, so a second one was distributed. He said the Committee has reviewed approximately 75% of the applications and that the hope is that within a week or two notification letters will be sent. He said that the Committee on Research had proposed a Bylaw change to accommodate the creation of two subcommittee - one to focus on research policy issues and the other one to review Faculty Research Grants. These proposed changes have been submitted to the Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction for review. Finally, he noted that the Committee had approximately an additional $100,000 to award but that the Committee also received approximately 100 additional applications so that in the end there was not much of a gain in dollars. I. Annual Report of the Committee on Distinguished Teaching Awards - Anna Kuhn, Chair, presented the report of the Committee and announced the 2002 recipients of the Distinguished Teaching
Awards: Richard K. Grosberg,
Evolution and Ecology, Douglas McColm, Department of Physics, Anita Oberbauer, Department of Animal Science, and Francisco Samaniego, Department of Statistics. The Committee's report was approved by acclamation. All four of the recipients were present to accept the award and make brief comments. Professor Kuhn's remarks concerning the achievements of each of the recipients appear as Appendix III to these minutes. Chair Gibeling thanked Professor Anna Kuhn and the dedicated work of the entire DTA Committee noting that they had an extra duty this year and that was the awarding of the recipients of the new Graduate Mentoring Award. 7. Reports of special committees A. Report of the Special Committee on Transportation and Parking - Chair Gibeling announced that since the term of the Committee had been extended until the October, 2002 meeting the final report will be submitted to the Representative Assembly at that time. He noted, however, that a copy of a letter dated June 5, 2002 from the committee to Vice Chancellor-Administration, Janet Hamilton, and Vice Chancellor - Resource Management and Planning, John Meyer, was a hand-out at today's meeting. (A copy of the hand-out is attached as Appendix IV to these minutes.) 8. Report of standing committees A.Report of the Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction concerning proposed amendments to the following Bylaws: 64. (International Studies and Exchanges), 87. (Privilege and Tenure), 99. (Research), and 126. (Joint Personnel). Peter Schiffman, Chair, Committee on International Studies and Exchanges, provided the justification and moved approval of the proposed amendments to Bylaw 64, appearing on page 59 of the Call to the Meeting. K. Hoover, Chair, Committee on Elections Rules and Jurisdiction offered an amendment. The maker of the motion accepted the amendment and by show of hands the motion carried. Bylaw 64.B, as amended, reads: 1. To represent the Davis Division in all matters connected with the Education Abroad Program. 2. To represent the Davis Division in all aspects of international education, exchange, and internships. 3. To initiate and assist in the formulation of policies and programs that affect international education, and that service to integrate it into campus academic programs. 4. To evaluate and approve courses offered for General Education credit through the Education Abroad Program. Chair Gibeling presented the proposed amendment to Bylaw 30 (inadvertently listed as Bylaw 126 on the Meeting Call) requested by the Joint Federation/Senate Personnel Committee. He said that this amendment is requested so that the Committee can provide an annual report that includes all cases reviewed during the academic review cycle. Rather than reporting to the Representative in the spring term of each academic year, they are requesting to report to the Representative Assembly in the Fall term. He noted that this amendment is consistent with the annual reporting of the Committee on Academic Personnel. John Vohs moved acceptance of the proposed amendment, appearing on page 69 of the meeting call. The motion was seconded and carried. Chair Gibeling announced that the proposed Bylaw for the Committee on Research (Bylaw 99.) was tabled to allow for a more in-depth review of the proposed changes by the Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction. B. Report of the Public Service Committee - Margaret Johns, Chair, Committee on Public Service presented the proposed amendment for a name change for the Distinguished Public Service Award. She said the Committee proposes that the name be changed to "Distinguished Scholarly Outreach Award" to clarify what this particular award exemplifies. She said many times faculty are nominated for this award with outstanding public service activities but oftentimes the activities delineated do not fall within the guidelines of the sustained direct extension of the faculty member's disciplinary or technical expertise. Discussion ensued in which the proposed name change was amended to: "Award for Distinguished Scholarly Public Service". Professor Johns accepted the amendment to her motion. A vote on the motion to approve the name change, as amended, carried. 9. Petitions of students - None 10.Unfinished business A. Proposed amendment to Davis Division Bylaw 137 regarding Chairs of Faculties Chair Gibeling presented the proposed amendment to Davis Division Bylaw 137 regarding Chairs of Faculties. He reported that this amendment was tabled at the February 26, 2002 meeting. Subsequent to that he said he has had discussions with faculty in the Law School and they have agreed to withdraw their objections to this amendment. Evelyn Silvia moved approval of the proposed amendment appearing on page 70 of the meeting call. The motion was seconded and carried. 11.University and faculty welfare - None 12.New business A. Proposed new Davis Division Bylaw 121 regarding the creation of an Undergraduate Council. Chair Gibeling presented the proposed new Davis Division Bylaw to establish an Undergraduate Council. He noted that a revision to this proposal was distributed at the door and supercedes the version included in the Meeting Call. He stated that it was his belief that the campus would benefit from a committee focusing on undergraduate education matters. He noted that the models for this council are the Davis Graduate Council and the Undergraduate Councils at UCLA and Irvine. He said the details are described in the document and that comments from the various committees consulted have been incorporated. He then highlighted the major changes in the document distributed today from what was distributed with the meeting call. He said clarification was provided concerning the membership of the Council, and also that CEP offered several comments to strengthen the program review duties that have been incorporated into the revision. Chair Gibeling called for a motion for the adoption of the version of Bylaw 121, dated June 5, 2002. Terry Murphy so moved. Quirino Paris offered an amendment to 121. B.4 to clarify that the Undergraduate Council would have the power and authority not only over transcript notations but also the power to establish policy and exercise authority on academic disqualifications and/or dismissals. The following revised wording was accepted: "To establish policy on and exercise authority on academic disqualifications and/or dismissals as well as over all undergraduate academic transcript notations." Kevin Hoover offered an amendment to 121.B.1 deleting the phrase "including, consistent with DDB 71, the implementation of Senate Regulations affecting undergraduate education". He stated that this phrase is unnecessary because it is already implicit in the Bylaw. Evelyn Silvia asked for clarification concerning Bylaw 64. International Studies and Exchanges as amended earlier and 121. C. 2.a. She said she wanted to make sure there was not a conflict. Her point was clarified and she was assured no conflict in the two Bylaws existed. A word change was suggested to 121.E.2.b. - "review periodically" rather than "periodically review". These three "friendly" amendments were accepted by the maker of the motion. In response to a question, Jeffery Gibeling clarified that there are three ex officio members and that nine members are appointed by the Committee on Committees. Joseph Kiskis spoke in favor of the new Bylaw stating that there are pressures that come from campus growth and changing priorities so having an Undergraduate Council would be an excellent way to provide a voice for undergraduate education. In addition, he said he thought having an Undergraduate Council would be an effective way to demonstrate our commitment to undergraduate education to WASC. On a call for the vote on the motion to approve Bylaw 121. Undergraduate Council, with the three amendments, the motion carried. Chair Gibeling asked for a motion to approve the related Bylaws to Bylaw 121 (56., 67., 80. 85., and 120.) Andrew Waterhouse so moved. Kevin Hoover offered an amendment to 56.C1 adding the phrase, "except those offered through the Education Abroad Program." An amendment to 80.B.18. was offered to be consistent with the amendment approved for Bylaw 121.B.4., substituting "graduate" for "undergraduate". These amendments were accepted by the maker of the motion. The motion to approve the related Bylaws to Bylaw 121, as amended, carried. B. Proposal from the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools Regarding Standardized Testing in Undergraduate Admissions - Chair Gibeling provided an overview of Professor Dorothy Perry's presentation, as Chair of the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools (BOARS), at the Special Meeting of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate on May 17, 2002. He noted that BOARS has been working on the University's current use of admissions tests over a long period of time and have recommended a series of changes, the latest of which is based on consideration of a request from President Atkinson that UC consider eliminating the SAT I examination from the required admissions tests. He summarized the key points of the BOARS proposal: a. BOARS is not calling for the elimination of admissions tests, but for the adoption of a new set of testing requirements that better meet UC's educational policy objectives. b. The BOARS proposal provides a statement of testing principles for the first time at UC. It is believed that few if any major universities have done this - considered and defined in clear policy terms their rationale for using the admissions tests they do. c. The intended result is a set of tests with greater depth, breadth and rigor than those now used. UC's testing requirements would not be "dumbed down" but rather, enhanced to more effectively measure student achievement in mastering the college preparatory curriculum taught in high school. The core exam would require a writing sample for the first time. d. Use of admissions tests tied to the college preparatory curriculum in high school would send a clear message to students, parents and schools that what matters most is achievement in school, not mastery of test-taking skills, and that students should prepare for college by taking and excelling in rigorous courses. e. At the same time, the testing burden on students would not be expected to increase. The tests to be taken by UC applicants would be designed in such a way that scores would be transportable to other institutions that continue to use the SAT I or ACT. f. Two of the nation's major testing agencies - the College Board and ACT - have each independently indicated a desire to work with UC on the development of admissions tests meeting the specifications drafted by BOARS. He said the BOARS proposal is based on the following set of principles: Admissions tests will be used at the University of California To assess academic preparation and achievement of UC applicants To predict success at UC beyond that predicted by high school GPA To aid in establishing UC eligibility To aid is selecting students for admission at individual UC campuses. He said the desired properties of admissions tests to be used for these purposes include the following: An admissions test should be a reliable measurement that provides a uniform assessment and should be fair across demographic groups. An admissions test should measure levels of mastery of content in UC-approved high school preparatory coursework and should provide information to students, parents, and educators enabling them to identify academic strengths and weaknesses. An admissions test should be demonstrably useful in predicting student success at UC and provide information beyond that which is contained in other parts of the application. An admissions test should be useful in a way that justifies its social and monetary costs. He stated that BOARS recommends a core achievement examination required of all students covering mastery of the fundamental disciplines needed for University-level work: language arts (reading and writing, including a writing sample) and mathematics. Chair Gibeling said the Divisions have now all been asked to endorse the BOARS proposal. BOARS wants some sense of Divisions accepting the way they are proceeding. Further refining and discussion will then take place and it will be brought back to the faculty for a vote of the full proposal. Patrick Farrell, Chair, Admissions and Enrollment Committee added that there has been widespread support from the Academic Senate, CSU for the BOARS proposal and UC ASUCD has also endorsed the principles. Discussion ensued and the issue of predictability was mentioned, and P. Farrell said there are lots of factors that play a role and that it is true that the tests do not give a completely valid idea of who is going to do best. But, that in BOARS extensive study of this issue they did not find a better predictor. However, the BOARS proposal is a set of principles and developments are on going. Evelyn Silvia made the following motion: The Davis Division endorses the action of BOARS to oversee the development of new tests for undergraduate admissions in accord with its stated principles and asks that the proposed testing array be presented to the faculty for review and approval. The motion was seconded. There was no further discussion and by a show of hands the motion carried with one opposed. The meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m. Anita Oberbauer, Secretary Representative Assembly of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate AO/mt Attachments |