College Senate Bulletin

State University of New York at Geneseo

College of Arts and Sciences

 

Correspondence to Dennis Showers, School of Education, South 222C, showers@geneseo.edu, 245-5264

Note: Page numbers indicate pages as per the paper copy of the Bulletins.

 

Bulletin No. 5

Bulletin No. 5

Pages 56-77

February 10, 2010

 

Topic Page

Agenda, College Senate Meeting, 16 February 2010 57

UCC Proposals for 16 February Senate Meeting 59

Minutes, Research Council 13 November 2009 60

Minutes, Senate Meeting 17 November 2009 61

Minutes UCC Meeting, 2 February 2010 66

Report, University Faculty Senator, 16 February 2010 67

 

 


Agenda for Senate Meeting on 16 February 2010

Call to Order

Adoption of the Agenda

Adoption of the Minutes


November 17, 2009, CSB #5, pp. 61-66

 

Senate Reports

 

President Christopher Dahl

Provost Carol Long

Chair Dennis Showers

Vice Chair Chris Leary

Past-Chair David Granger

Secretary Brian Morgan

Treasurer Gregg Hartvigsen

University Faculty Senator Maria Lima

Vice President, Student Assoc. Nicholas Kaasik

 

Reports of the Standing Committees of the Senate

 

Undergraduate Curricula Robert Owens

First Reading

New Course (Found in CSB #5, page 59)

INTD110, ESL Oral Communication.

 

Course Revision (Found in CSB #5, page 59)

ENGL 237, Voices and Perspectives

 

Program Revision (Found in CSB #5, page 59)

B.A. in English: Track in Literature/Track in Creative Writing

 

Second Reading

New Course (Found in CSB 4, pages 36-37)

CDSC 207, Speech and Language Development and Intervention for ESL Speakers in College

EDUC 363, International Field Experience: Early Childhood, Childhood, and Adolescence Education

HIST 355, Slave Rebellions and Resistance in the Atlantic World

INTD 215, Central European Cultural History

 

Course Revision (Found in CSB 4, page 37)

ARTS 200, 204, 205, 210, 215, 220, 222, 225, 230, 240, 245, 250, 305, 310, 311, 315, 316, 320, 321, 325, 326, 330, 340, 341, 345, 346, 350, 351

CSCI 142, Principles of Computer Science

 

Course Deletion (Found in CSB #4, page 37)

CSCI 141, Introduction to Computer Science

CSCI 384, Parallelism

 

Program Revision (Found in CSB 4, pages 37-38)

B.A. in Art History

Minor in Computer Applications

Combined Degree Program, BA/MAT in Adolescence English Education

Major in Political Science

 

Undergraduate Policies Leigh O’Brien

Graduate Academic Affairs Susan Salmon

Student Affairs Justin Behrend

Faculty Affairs James Bearden

 

Old Business

New Business

Adjournment

 

 

Undergraduate Curriculum Committee Proposals

 

Go to the “Senate 2009-2010/First Reading 2009 11 17” folder at http://boxes.geneseo.edu/outboxes/DeanOfCollege/doc/ucc/ to view the department proposals. The major points are summarized below.

 

New Course

INTD110, ESL Oral Communication.

 

This course presents basic communication survival skills to students learning English as a second language. The primary focus will be on functional English, pragmatic language skills and understanding cultural differences. A secondary focus will be on pronunciation, learning vocabulary, idioms and common English sentence structure. May be taken for credit twice. 1(0-2). Offered every fall and spring.

 

Course Revision

ENGL 237, Voices and Perspectives

 

Title and description changes to include non-American English voices

Slot course

 

An exploration of diversity in literary and cinematic traditions, focusing on the perspective of once-marginalized writers. The texts will be studied in the context of such factors as class, ethnicity, gender, race, sexual orientation, religion and/or ability. May be taken for credit twice under two different subtitles. 3(3-0)

 

Program Revision

B.A. in English: Track in Literature/Track in Creative Writing

 

Changes Bulletin description to read: (Additions in bold):

 

One course exploring cultural intersections, that is, a course focusing on the work of under-represented authors and/or critical approaches to difference, including class, ethnicity, gender, race, sexual orientation, religion and/or ability, in non-traditional literature. Majors must take one course at any level in non-traditional literature, that is, a course whose primary emphasis is on gender, minority, or international studies, e.g., ENGL 237 Voices and Perspectives, ENGL 242 Literatures of the African Diaspora, ENGL 337 African- American Literature, ENGL 267 Non-Western Literature, ENGL 318 M/Black British Literature and Culture, ENGL 336 Native American Literature, ENGL 360, M/Post-Colonial Literature, ENGL 345 Gay and Lesbian Literature, ENGL 343 Women and Literature. The course taken to fulfill this requirement may also be used to satisfy one of the basic requirements in the major or concentration; if this is done, three additional elective credits can be chosen.

 

B.A in English: Track in Creative Writing

 

Change Bulletin description to read (Additions in bold):

 

One course exploring cultural intersections, that is, a course focusing on the work of under-represented authors and/or critical approaches to difference, including class, ethnicity, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation and/or ability (from Engl 237, 267 242, 360, 336, 337, 318, 345, 343). in world or multicultural literature

 

 

B.A. in English: Literature Track

 

Change Bulletin description to read (Additions in bold):

 

All remaining program requirements must be met, including 24 hours in literature, a second course in American literature, a course in the work of a major literary figure, and a course exploring cultural intersections non-traditional literature course.

 

Minutes of the Research Council

November 13, 2009

 

Members Present: Anne Baldwin, Doug Baldwin, Lori Bernard, Betsy Colón, Emilye Crosby, Savi Iyer, Chris Leary, Jani Lewis, Denise Scott, Kazu Yokoyama

 

The meeting was convened by Jani Lewis at 3:00 PM.

 

  • Dean Johnston Assistantships

Rankings for the applications for the Dean Johnston Assistantships were tallied and the results were announced.

 

  • SUNY Faculty Senate invitation to participate in SUNY Undergraduate Shaping New York’s Future: A Showcase of Scholarly Posters at the Capitol and method of choosing posters

Details of the invitation were discussed. Anne noted that Steve West had agreed to serve as “campus liaison” for the event. The Council members agreed to review and vote on the poster choices. Methods for choosing posters were deliberated and the Council agreed that each department could nominate posters chosen for the “Best of GREAT Day 2009” and could also nominate up to two additional posters, provided that they are in final format. It was agreed that posters nominations should be submitted in PDF format through Department Chairs by November 30th. The Council also voted to fund travel expenses for up to 2 students per poster from a special allocation of undergraduate travel grant funds. They also agreed to fund expenses for either Stephen West or a faculty member to accompany the students to Albany.

 

  • NSF Responsible Conduct of Research (RCR) Training Requirements

Details on the National Science Foundation’s new requirement for RCR training for undergraduate and graduate students supported by NSF grants, which takes effect in January of 2010, were presented by Anne. An institutional membership to the Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative (CITI) will be purchased using indirect cost funds. Completion of the CITI RCR course would serve as Geneseo’s minimum requirement for students to satisfy RCR training. Anne also pointed out that as part of the NSF requirements each institution must appoint an individual to serve as an “RCR Officer” to oversee the RCR training program. The Council suggested names of several faculty members who might be interested.

 

  • Update on the Collaborative Research Task Force Activities

Anne read an email from Michael Lynch which provided an update on the task force activities since the last Research Council meeting. Anne also handed out the “Best Practices in Collaborative Research” document created by Bonnie Swoger and Kristi Hannam for the task force. Related to these, Anne noted that at a recent meeting in Albany Research Foundation staff had announced a plan to create a SUNY-wide database of research expertise and funding opportunities. This database might be developed using InfoEd’s Global Expertise Network for Industry, Universities, and Scholars (GENIUS) system which Geneseo has access to through its Sponsored Programs Information Network (SPIN Plus) membership.

 

There was additional discussion on possible roles for the Research Council in mentoring and promotion of collaborative research.

 

The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 PM.

Respectfully submitted,

Jani Lewis, Research Council

 

 

College Senate Meeting

17 November 2009

 

Adams C, Aimers J, Barbarello A, Bearden J, Behrend J, Coloccia R, Delgado R, Derne S, DeZarn D, Dolce J, Farmer V, Filice C, Foley A, Geiger C, Gentry K, Gohlman B, Granger D, Gu A, Hannam K, Hanrahan D, Harrison B, Hartvigsen G, Heap A, Iyer S, Kaasik N, Kirkwood J, Klotz M, Kreutter C, Kuntz A, Lauricella A, Leary C, Lewis J, Lima M, Liwanag M, Long C, Lovett J, Mackenzie D, Marcus G, Matthews C, McPherson D, Morgan B, Nathanson J, O’Brien L, Owens B, Park G, Perrone M, Pridmore A, Rault P, Semel B, Simmons D, Steinhauer A, Stolee M, Stuppert S, Swoger B, Tang C, Vasiliev R, Weng D.

 

Call to Order

Chair Showers called the Senate to order at 4:00.

 

Adoption of the Agenda

The agenda of November 17, 2009 was adopted from the floor with no objections or corrections.

Adoption of the Minutes
The minutes of the September 22, 2009 and October 23, 2009 were adopted from the floor with no objections or corrections.

 

Senate Reports

 

President’s Report – C. Dahl

 

President Dahl reported that on October 22, shortly after the last Senate meeting, a "summit" meeting of the 6 Big Ideas task force chairs was held.  Task Force chairs provided updates on their work since the interim reports and discussed fruitful areas of overlap between the work of various task forces.  A full report of the meeting is available on the 6 Big Ideas wiki.  President Dahl invited all members of the college community to look at the materials on the wiki and provide comments if they wish.  The work of the task forces will feed into the discussions of the College's Strategic Planning Group.

The recent $90 million mid-year cut to the SUNY budget has now been allocated to the campuses.  Geneseo's share this year is $890,000--rather less than feared, but still quite significant.  The bad news is that the cuts will continue into next year's budget and may amount to as much as $1.6 million on an annualized basis.  In consultation with the Chair of Senate, Dahl is convening an all-college meeting on Tuesday, December 1, at 4:00 p.m., to discuss the budget. At that time he and Vice President Levison will present a detailed overview of this year's budget, outline the steps the College has taken to balance it so far, and report on some of the implications for next year and beyond.  Levison will meet with the College Budget Priorities Committee on November 20, also to present a detailed report on the budget and related issues.   As the College faces difficult budget decisions, the Administration is committed to as much openness and transparency on the budget as possible.  Both consultive bodies that address budget issues, the Strategic Planning Group and the Budget Priorities Committee, will continue to be involved in the budget and planning process.

Dahl also reminded Senate of the State Budget cycle, which begins with budget requests from SUNY and other state agencies.  Vice President Levison is a member of the system's budget task force.  Its first task was to recommend an method for allocating the $90 million in mid-year cuts.  Its current task is to advise on the budget request and the flexibility proposals for 2010-11.  Dahl observed, once again, that the most desirable outcome for SUNY would be campus-based variable tuition and new, more independent legal status for the system as a whole.  The likelihood of enhanced support from state tax dollars in the current environment is very slight.  He will keep the College community apprised of budget advocacy efforts, and he ended by thanking the student body for their recent advocacy efforts in support of SUNY.

 

Provost’s Report – C. Long

 

Attended the SUNY CAO’s meeting in Cooperstown. Talks on the budget and is learning about our sectors comprehensives in SUNY and at Community colleges.

 

Attended the ACE Leadership Network meeting on International Education in Washington, D.C.

 

Mitch Leventhal, Vice Chancellor for Global Affairs, was recently on campus.

 

Chairs’ Report - D. Showers

 

Faculty should had received e-mail indicating the fall elections have been posted online.

 

Chancellor’s Group of 200 has met. Chancellor emphasized the model of integrating higher education into pre-college education called “project strive”. Her vision is to integrate SUNY with the public school system in NYS.

 

Vice Chair - Chris Leary

Executive Committee is currently working --- thanks for your help.

 

Past Chair – David Granger

Budget Priorities Committee will be meeting once the SUNY budget picture became clearer and also to discuss any budget implications of the Six Big Ideas Task Forces recommendations once their reports are reviewed by the SPG

 

Secretary ReportBrian Morgan

No report.

 

Treasurer Report – Gregg Hartvigsen

Balance of $576.45 in account.

 

University Faculty Senate Report – Maria Lima

 

Shared a report from the Plenary meeting where the Chancellor spoke. The Chancellor’s report include:

  • A shared governance at the system level may warrant a second look --- the days of blaming system for everything are over.

  • The Chancellor hopes to launch her plan in April. The plan can be viewed through the Geneseo webpage with a link to the Chancellor’s Strategic Plan site --- she invites our feedback.

  • An ambitious plan is needed. Policy makers, donors, business world – need to have faith in the system. SUNY employs 87 thousand people – what if we were to leave the state?

  • The question that really got Zimpher excited concerned the role of teacher education in her strategic planning. “Teacher education is at the heart of access and success. Teacher education is an all university responsibility.

  • M. Lima reported that the text of all the resolutions unanimously approved at the last Plenary will appear in the next Bulletin. In particular – not for vote – is the Resolution to Reinstate the Faculty Exchange Scholars Designation and Program. If the program is reinstated we will feel it’s worth being part of a large system. The program was created in the early 70’s with the dual objectives to enrich the intellectual environment in the State University of New York. Therefore, the University Programss and Awards Committee recommends the re-institution of the Faculty Exchange Scholars Designation and Program and restoration of its funding.

  • Lastly, changes in General Education. The University Colleges recently proposed changes in the delivery of General Education. The feeling being a rebalancing of SUNY General Education will encourage greater flexibility and curricular integrity in both two-year and four-year colleges.

 

Questions/Remarks:

 

President Dahl – Regarding the issue of shared governance, at the President’s meeting the Chancellor handed out a preliminary sketch of the organizational chart which includes Ken O’Brien, University Faculty Senate Chair and Tina Good, Chair of Community Colleges – this shows there is action on shared governance.

 

Student Association Report – Nick Kaasik

H1N1 update --- four student senators are absent due to being ill with H1N1.

 

There are between 20 and 30 students currently participating in a protest/sit-in on the Sturges Quad in order to raise concerns regarding the budget cuts. There message to the state “don’t leave us out in the cold”. A lot of media attention has been received and the event has been successful. Tomorrow there will be a protest at 1:15 at the Sturges quad with a 2:15 sit-in at Erwin Hall. This is not an administrative protest. This report was well received by members of the Senate.

 

Undergraduate Curricula Report – Bob Owens

The next meeting will be held on 12/8/09 at 4:00 p.m. in Sturges 105.

 

First Reading:

Undergraduate Curricula Report – Bob Owens

First Reading:

New Courses (CSB 3, p.32)

  • ANTH 237, Art & Material Culture

  • COMN 349, Advanced Issues in Personal and Professional Communication

  • CSCI 390, Topics in Computer Science

 

Motion carries.

 

First Reading:

New Core Courses (08-09, CSB 6, p.76)

  • HIST 111, World History

  • HIST 163, African-American History to 1877

  • HIST 164, African-American History from 1877

  • HIST 267, Women & U. S. Social Movements (07-08, CSB9, p.143)

 

Motion carries.

 

First Reading:

Course Revisions (CSB 3, p.33)

  • HIST 322, German Society & Politics since 1945

  • PLSC 322, German Society and Politics since 1945

 

Motion carries.

 

First Reading:

Course Deletions (CSB 3, p.33)

  • HIST 229, German Society & Politics Since 1945

  • PLSC 229, German Society & Politics Since 1945

 

Motion carries.

 

Second Reading:

Course Revisions (CSB 2, p. 10)

  • PHIL 209, Phenomenology and Existentialism

  • PHIL 397 Seminar: Major Problems

  • PHIL 398 Seminar: Major Philosophers

Motion carries.

 

Program Revision (CSB2, p.11)

  • Minor in Biology

 

Motion Carries.

 

Undergraduate Academic Policies, Core and Review – Leigh O’Brien

At the meeting of 10/29/09 – three things were discussed:

  • When students can register.

  • Course repeat policy

  • Current pass/fail policy of which there are 2 parts to be considered today.

 

Motion – FIRST READING

Reword the statement in the Bulletin to read “Courses taken under the pass/fail option cannot be used to fulfill any graduation requirement other than the 120 required credit hours.”

 

Current: The pass/fail option is available only for electives, not for any required courses. That is, students may not elect the pass/fail option for any course in the major or minor department, for any course used for the major, minor or concentration, or for any course used to meet core/general education graduation requirements.

 

Discussion:

 

S. Derne, SOCL: Would a student be able to take Non-major courses as Pass/Fail?

 

M. Perrone, PSYC Major: Exactly which courses are considered “graduation requirements”?

 

Dell Brown, Registrar: In the past it prohibited students from taking courses in their major beyond what is required for the program. For example, they couldn’t take a course pass/fail if it was taught in the department of their major/minor. The proposed change in language makes it so it’s not as restrictive. The new policy would allow more students to take extra courses in their field beyond what is required for their major.

 

M.Stolee, HIST: How does the new statement apply to minors? Will new wording allow courses in a minor be on Pass/Fail?

 

J. Dolce, CIT: We could specify what could/could not be included in the 120 credit hours.

 

D. Brown: For exceptions to the policy, students can go through for extenuating circumstances is the waiver substitution policy.

 

V. Farmer, PLSC: What happens if a student takes a basic intro course as pass/fail while they are in one major and then changes their major?

 

D. Brown: This is where the waiver substitution would come into effect.

 

M. Klotz, PLSC: I understand that AOP students in their 1st semester can take Gen Ed courses on pass/fail, will this change under the new policy?

 

D. Brown: They have a separate policy.

 

J. Lovett, BIOL: Is there a maximum # of courses you can take pass/fail.

 

Showers: Yes.

 

J. Lovett: Related requirements for a major – NOT department courses – can they be taken pass/fail? Are these included in the “graduation requirement”?

 

C. Leary, MATH: Several years ago when U. S. History requirement was instituted, there was a distinction made between graduation requirement and the U. S. History requirement, the language as posted says you can’t take a pass/fail course as a graduation requirement?

 

D. Showers: Does the committee have a position on this?

 

Leigh O’Brien, EDUC: This has not been addressed.

 

Bill Harrison, ENGL: The new wording would allow English minors to take courses pass/fail.

 

S. Derne: The minors thing needs to be worked out, this should go back to the committee.

 

M. Stolee: Update to C. Leary’s comment – the history department “erased” U.S. History requirement – that distinction is gone and now just a requirement. Courses offered by your major department can be used to complete the U.S. History requirement.

 

Motion DEFEATED.

 

Motion

 

Change the wording of the policy on the grade required to earn a P (Pass) to:

  • To receive a grade of P, a minimum grade of C- must be earned in the course. D and E grades are translated to F.

Current:

  • To receive a grade of P, a minimum grade of D must be earned in the course. E grades are translated as F’s.

 

D. Brown, Registar: Competency for most of our courses is set at a higher level than D. The idea is to make the minimum competency requirement consistent with the pass/fail threshold. Students choose pass/fail option, the instructor is not informed of this and the grade is translated after all final grades are turned in.

 

B. Gohlman, Hist: If a student doesn’t sign-up for pass/fail and gets a D can the course still be counted towards graduation, will it count toward the core?

 

Answer: This affects only AOP students, and AOP students need to be made aware of this during advisement.

 

Motion carried.

 

Graduate Academic AffairsSusan Salmon

Susan Salmon - absent. No report.

 

Student Affairs – Justin O’Brien

Next meeting is the Tuesday after Thanksgiving.

 

Faculty Affairs – James Bearden

Meeting with the Dean regarding the block schedule to be submitted for next fall will be the same that was used for Spring ’10. J. Bearden thanked all for their e-mails and suggestions.

 

Old Business

No report.

 

New Business

C. Tang, MATH: China Night is this Saturday, tickets on sale for $8 for the meal and show.

 

Michael [unaudible]: Concern with the new course registration policy being that no overloads will be signed until after the drop/add period – what effect will this have on Financial Aid and also student uncertainty with what class schedule will be.

 

Provost Long: At the department chairs meeting this was brought up and the Provost has spoke with the Dean regarding this issue. The Dean states that Financial Aid shouldn’t be affected. Reason for the change was that past practice was to only open drop/add after the semester had started. Last summer it was changed to re-open registration prior to the beginning of classes and then have a couple of days of drop/adds, this will be done again in January prior to the beginning of Spring classes.

 

Discussion: If students are given overload slips now they are turned away from the Records Office and told to hold the forms until January, however the students are not on campus.

 

D. Showers: The Executive Committee will take this up at their next meeting.

 

Adjournment

At 5:04 p.m.

 

 

Minutes for UCC Meeting

4 p.m., Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

 

UCC Members present: B. Owens (chair), R. Vasilie, T. Bazzett, J. Yee, A. Kuntz, M. Jensen, R. Coloccia, A. Gu, J. Kirkwood, B. Harrison, J. Lovett, and G. Marcus

 

Guests: S. Iyer

Chair Bob Owens called the meeting to order at 4:05

 

The committee passed the minutes of the December 8th, 2009 meeting.

 

Discussion of Proposals

Course Revision:

ENGL 237, Voices and Perspectives

The English department requested a title and description changes to allow a broader perspective of voices including those of non-American English authors. The committee suggested some minor alterations to the wording of the bulletin description which were accepted by Bill Harrison who acted as a representative for the English department. The revision passed without dissent.

 

Program Revision:

B.A. in English: Track in Literature/Track in Creative Writing.

The English department requested that the description requirement for completing the track in literature and the track in creative writing be revised to specify current language requiring completion of courses under a broad rubric of “nontraditional” and “multicultural” literature. The revision passed without discussion or dissent.

 

 

New Business:

The Office of the Dean asked that the committee consider for approval, a change in department designation for the recently tabled new course CDSC 110 to INTD 110. This change will better reflect where this course fits into the college curriculum. In addition, to bring the Carnegie unit designation in line with the course credits associated with the course, the Office of the Dean would like to change the designation from (1-1) to (0-2). This change better reflects the structure of the course which does not include significant, formal lecture sessions. The changes were approved without dissent by the committee.

 

Savi Iyer also noted that the Office of the Dean has announced a February 15th deadline for UCC proposals that departments would like implemented by Spring 2011. This date will allow UCC to consider and vote on the proposal, and will allow two Senate readings during the current semester.

 

Old Business: none

 

The meeting was adjourned at 4:35.

 

Respectfully submitted, Terry Bazzett

 

UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATOR REPORT

February 16, 2010

 

The 154th Faculty Senate Plenary at Cobleskill (January 29-30th) was all about the governor’s “Public Higher Education Empowerment and Innovation Act” which--I believe--will provide SUNY and CUNY the flexibility needed to become centers of job creation. While “politics” does not belong on the Senate floor officially, Patterson’s bill will have a significant impact on academic programs at Geneseo, and this is why we need to support it.

 

The University Senate President, strategically, did not bring a resolution to the floor in support of the governor’s bill because most of the Plenary was spent in explaining its details to University Senators. When Ken O’Brien took a straw vote on Saturday, it became clear that most senators will definitely vote for one at the next Plenary (New Paltz, April 22-24).

 

While the flexibility in the governor’s proposal will allow SUNY campuses to respond to external issues more quickly, the central concern appears to be the proposed tuition policies, specifically differential tuition for both campuses and programs. While there is an oversight mechanism built into the proposal to ensure a degree of equity, numerous issues remain, such as the long-standing tradition of the state government of simply reducing state aid whenever tuition rates have been raised. You will also find in the Bulletin what System sent us about the bill--why it is good for New York, for SUNY, and for CUNY--together with an executive summary of the 2010-11 Budget. The union is concerned about the probable elimination of programs, not to mention of scheduled salary raises… For the first time ever, I am going against UUP.

 

I am concerned that if we do not support Patterson’s bill, there will be NO SUNY in a few years. I was there with the students protesting when the governor came to Geneseo: “we are not your ATM” they chanted. It’s up to us—citizens of the state—to tell our legislators what we want. We want SUNY to be as strong a system, to quote Chris, as Michigan and Virginia.

 

The process of privatization of public higher education in New York State is scary to me. I have also included the Comprehensive Colleges Sector Report that spells out all our concerns about the Governor’s Plan. Many here will remember me screaming on this floor that the job of the state is to educate its citizens. Well, I’ve given up on the state and we do not have to sink with the state.

 

Paling in comparison, the other two issues Senators heard more about at the Cobleskill Plenary were the changes in GenEd requirements and streamlining assessment. I both emailed the proposed GenEd changes to faculty-l and made the document available on the Senate Bulletin asking for your input and heard from NO ONE, so I’m assuming that you also welcome the flexibility. I remember the uproar more than ten years ago when the non-funded mandate was thrown at us. At that point system was the devil and we, the innocent victims. This new Chancellor is all about shared governance, so she formally apologized to Ken for the time constraints (he got the draft of the resolution on December 14th). The Board of Trustees has endorsed the Chancellor’s resolution revising the SUNY general education program. The last Bulletin has the FAQ sheet with more specifics about the changes (see below).

Flexibility is also at the core of the SUNY Assessment Initiative and this time there’s has been real consultation since the Board of Trustees will only vote for it next month. As I wrote our Provost, I support the changes. The SUNY Assessment Initiative is actually a response to last year's University Senate Resolution asking for relief from the endless rounds of assessment. At Cobleskill, System Interim Provost David Lavallee explained that campuses will take responsibility for developing assessment plans that are consistent with regional accreditation norms, and that System Administration’s role will be to facilitate that with on-going support for best practices. David did mention System will also be charged with an auditing function--occasional spot-check-visits to randomly selected campuses.

 

The highlight of the plenary from where I stood, however, was the Report from Pedro Caban, Vice Provost for Diversity and Educational Equity, and the unanimous vote on the resolution to establish the Committee for Diversity and Cultural Competence as a Standing Committee of the Faculty Senate. Caban emphasized what we at Geneseo already know-- that we must look at diversity as two concepts that are in conversation all the time: diversity as requirement for excellence and diversity as related to access, equity, and social justice. Each institution has a distinctive academic mission and individually will define what diversity means to them. New York’s diversity is SUNY’s strength. His Office (ODEE) employs a comprehensive and inclusive approach to diversity that promotes academic excellence, social justice, equitable representation, and workforce development. He has created the Faculty Diversity Program and the Chief Diversity Officers Network, among other initiatives. Caban also wants to improve the education pipeline. If you want his power-point presentation, please email me. Caban mentioned that if a campus comes to his office with really good ideas to increase diversity, he will fund them. I am sending him my proposal to include diversity as a criterion for the evaluation of faculty.

 

***

 

FAQs for the Revised General Education Program

(Executive Committee of the University Faculty Senate (January 2010)

 

Preface:

On January 20, 2010, the SUNY Board of Trustees passed a resolution amending the December 15, 1998 Resolution 98-241 that established a General Education Requirement for every SUNY baccalaureate recipient. It is important to understand what this new amendment to the original requirement does and what it does not do. In short, the ONLY change in the general education of the past decade is that colleges can now create general education programs of at least 30 credits (no change) distributed among at least seven of the original ten content areas, which now must include both mathematics and basic communication. (The “seven of ten” is the change.)

There is no change in the courses that have been approved for general education in each of the ten categories, nor is there any current change in any other mandates relating to the SUNY general education requirement.

 

Frequently Asked Questions:

  1. Q: When is the amended general education policy effective?
    A: Fall 2010.

 

  1. Q: Is there flexibility as to the effective date to say Fall 2011? Campuses may have difficulty fully implementing changes by Fall 2010.
    A: The implementation date for the policy remains Fall 2010, but campuses need not change their general education requirements by that date.

This question reveals an issue that needs to be understood. In almost all cases, SUNY students are facing several different sets of general education requirements: the SUNY requirement, which has now been amended to give campuses greater flexibility, and campus specific requirements, which are different campus to campus. And, there is even a difference between community and baccalaureate colleges with only the latter being held to creating a general education program that, at a minimum, incorporates the SUNY requirements.

 

  1. Q: How does this policy work in combination with the recently passed policy on Student Mobility?
    A: One possible outcome of the new policy would be to facilitate student mobility by allowing baccalaureate granting schools more flexibility in designing their general education programs. They could take advantage of the fact that many community college students transfer with more than one course in a designated SUNY general education

 

  1. Q: The policy has a statement on providing resources from SUNY for Gen Ed implementation and faculty recognition on our campus. How does this work, and what is the process for receiving the funds?
    A: This section was part of the original General Education resolution, which did have a special resource pool set aside to assist campuses with implementing the new program. We know of no such resources set aside in 2010.

 

  1. Do we have a clear understanding of how many Gen Ed “silos” the community colleges will deliver, or agree to have completed by students prior to graduation from the community college?
    A: This has not changed from the original informal agreement that was concluded by an exchange of letters in which the community college presidents indicated that students who earned AA and AS degrees would graduate with at least seven of the general education requirements completed

 

  1. Is the answer to #5 above different depending upon the type of degree a student earns at the community college?
    A: The agreement remains seven for students graduating with AA and AS degrees and five for students who earn AAS degrees.

 

  1. Do community colleges have any obligation, or absolute requirement for their students to have completed a certain number of Gen. Ed courses prior to graduation from the community college?
    A: No, only those required by their specific degree programs. Many, however, are advised to complete more, especially if they have decided to complete a baccalaureate degree at a SUNY school. In addition, many community college students far exceed the number of credits needed (30) in general education courses; they are simply not all in the right silos. Students in the sciences, for example, complete many more than a single course in the Natural Sciences, and so on across the curriculum.

 

  1. Is it still true that any four year college can decide to require all 10 of the SUNY general education content areas if the college decides to do so?
    A: In a word, yes. In fact, a college could, as many have, add either new fields or additional requirements, such as a second Natural Science or a second foreign language. Nothing in this revised policy prohibits the continuation of these requirements. But those “additional” requirements exceed the minima established by SUNY policy.

 

  1. Is it true that four year colleges will now be free to allow students to “double up” on some silos to allow for more specialization, providing the students complete 30 hours of approved general education credits in at least seven of the SUNY content areas?
    A: Yes, it’s true, as long as basic communication and mathematics, which are still required
    , remain among the competencies. In fact, the flexibility of the amended program would allow for different general education requirements by different Schools on a single campus (such as Sciences, Arts and Letters, Business), each tailored to students in that group of academic majors, as long as each includes at least 30 credits in at least seven of the ten content areas.

 

  1. Are 4-year SUNY schools required to accept transfer credit for up to 60 credits earned at a 2-year school, and will those transfer credits substitute for the first two-year major requirements of the four-year school?
    A: In terms of total credits, the answer is yes. Students who receive an AA or AS degree at a SUNY community college are to be given “junior” status, with every general education course transferring to meet the SUNY general education requirement.

Beyond that, there are courses taken in academic majors. The general education courses have been approved by a SUNY-wide faculty committee that has been working for a decade, and hence, the courses transfer seamlessly, carrying with them general education credit. As mandated in the November, 2009 Board of Trustees Resolution on Student Mobility, a similar process is being developed for those courses in academic majors that are normally offered in the first two years. Where questions about the transferability of such courses arise, from either sending or receiving institutions or from a student, there are now system-wide appeals processes that empower university-wide faculty committees to advise the University Provost, who is authorized to make a final decision.

The goal of the recent resolutions and processes is clear: to make the long-standing SUNY promise of seamless transfer among its colleges and university centers a reality, especially for the thousands of students who begin their college studies at one of SUNY’s community colleges.

 

  1. Will SUNY continue to determine whether courses fulfill General Education requirements, or will those decisions be made at the individual campuses? 

A: With very few exceptions, the work of the last decade has been to ensure that there are recognized standards that carry across all of SUNY, and this aspect of the SUNY general education program will not change.

 

  1. Now that there's no centralized General Education assessment, isn't the de facto outcome that the campuses can do anything they want?

A: No, absolutely not. First, the resolution does not decrease the general education requirement to seven areas. The credit requirement remains 30 credits, but that can now be met in at least seven of the designated content areas, instead of a mandated ten. These constraints remain in force. Second, campuses will be held to strict assessment measures by their accreditation bodies. The assessment criteria of these agencies have increased measurably in the past decade, which is what provides one rationale for the proposed revision of the SUNY Assessment System, which has been a model in the past.

 

  1. How does the amended policy affect waivers?

  1. As we understand the issue, campuses have the authority to waive local requirements, but cannot waive state-mandated or SUNY Board policies. However, the original implementation of the general education policy allowed for specific waivers for some specialized programs, such as in Nursing, certain science and technologies and several performing arts. In this regard, nothing has changed. Yet, since faculty have more flexibility in designing the general education requirements for their college or program, the need for waivers may have decreased.

 

The Public Higher Education Empowerment

and Innovation Act

 

GOOD FOR NEW YORK

The Public Higher Education Empowerment and Innovation Act harnesses high-impact, zero-cost solutions that will create jobs, build the foundation for tomorrow’s economy and strengthen public higher education – while saving millions of taxpayer dollars.

 

The Act builds on the unprecedented cooperation and energetic partnership of SUNY and CUNY in working with Governor Paterson and the Division of the Budget so as to design a landmark higher education plan to reach each and every community throughout New York State with broad access, high quality and affordability. This is a major step in unleashing the public university sector to achieve the promise of economic growth through top quality public higher education from Community College to Research Center first envisioned for New York decades ago.

 

With the implementation of the Empowerment and Innovation Act, the State University of New York estimates that over the next ten years, its campuses will be able to help create over 10,000 new jobs and invest over $8.5 billion in capital construction which will support over 43,700 direct and 21,800 indirect construction jobs.

 

GOOD FOR SUNY

 

As the State University becomes more responsible for its own finances, its spending on academic pursuits will not only benefit the students that it serves, but also create a larger union workforce (faculty, staff and graduate students) and a better work environment.

 

With fullest integration of academic programs from first year at community college to last year of a professional degree, students will be able to maximize opportunities throughout New York’s public higher education systems. This creates a more cost-effective educational environment for both the student as well as for New York taxpayers who support both the State and City Universities and local community colleges.

 

With greater financial independence and streamlined operations, SUNY and CUNY will be poised to develop strong public-private partnerships, new sources of revenue and enhanced research funds. Most important, the Act will provide the financial stability (through multi-year budget plans) and increased opportunities that our students, employees and taxpayers need.

 

At a time when the nation is focused on the cost of health care, increased autonomy will also enhance our Academic Health Centers’ abilities to adapt to ever-changing health care delivery methods which are critical to continue their public health care missions.

 

Research and workforce development initiatives will take advantage of the synergies of multi-campus collaborations and partnerships. The number of successful partnerships in place which have focused on nanotechnology, biotechnology and energy will be certain to increase and expand into other key areas of research and job creation.

 

GOOD FOR YOUR CAMPUS

Implementation of a tuition policy under the auspices of the Board of Trustees will provide the financial stability necessary to establish multi-year plans to address campus goals and invest in new faculty hires and academic quality initiatives.

 

Land use and public-private partnerships will enable campuses to be entrepreneurial and generate revenues which will enhance the ability to fund current needs and future growth.

 

Streamlined operational and procurement practices will translate into saved resources and efficiencies on campus.

 

WHAT’S IN THE BILL

 

Tuition Policy and Financing

 

  • Allows for differential tuition by campus and program;

  • SUNY Board must adopt tuition policy that is fair, equitable and responsible and that includes guidelines for across the board tuition adjustments, differential tuition and enrollment planning;

  • SUNY Board must adopt out of state enrollment maximum percentage limitations;

  • Invests all tuition, fees and other self-generated revenues in SUNY campuses, students and faculty; and

  • Repeals Education Law §355(8-b), enacted in 2009.

 

Land Use, Public Private Partnerships and Construction Fund

 

  • Authorizes the SUNY Board to accept gifts of real property;

  • Authorizes SUNY to undertake land leases without special legislation for projects not in conflict with campus missions, subject to approval by a newly chartered State University Asset Maximization Review Board;

  • Authorizes SUNY to enter joint ventures and public private partnerships, subject to approval by the State University Asset Maximization Review Board;

  • Requires land leases include: MWBE, prevailing wage, union worker rights protection, reverter clauses, and project labor agreements;

  • Allows the State University Construction Fund to use expanded delivery methods, including design/build and construction manager at risk;

  • Eliminates burdensome and duplicative State Comptroller/Attorney General pre-approval of Construction Fund contracts;

  • Waives Construction Fund performance bonds for contracts less than $250,000;

  • Authorizes DASNY (Dormitory Authority) to finance/construct facilities on behalf of State-operated and community college affiliates; and

  • Authorizes DASNY to finance/construct community college dormitories directly on behalf of each community college.

 

Procurement Efficiencies

 

  • Eliminates burdensome and duplicative State Comptroller/Attorney General pre-approval of SUNY,CUNY and their Construction Funds contracts;

  • Broadens SUNY access to the Office of General Services centralized contracts for goods and services; and

  • Streamlines approval for residential halls built by SUNY alumni associations.

 

Operations Efficiencies

 

  • Provides protection from liability for students participating in clinical internships related to their field of study;

  • Provides an Employee Retirement System (ERS) option for medical, dental and optometric interns; and

  • Aligns SUNY and CUNY to the eight year master planning process applicable to the independent colleges and universities in NYS.

 

Hospital Reforms

 

  • Provisions relating to nurse wage rates and pay differentials;

  • Facilitates hospitals participating in joint ventures and managed care to provide health care related services; and

  • Eliminates burdensome and duplicative State Comptroller/Attorney General pre-approval of SUNY hospital contracts, including those involving real property transactions.

 

 

State University of New York

2010-11 Executive Budget – DRAFT

 

 

SUMMARY

 

The 2010-11 Executive Budget introduces the Public Higher Education Empowerment and Innovation Act, which harnesses high-impact, zero-cost solutions that will create jobs, build the foundation for tomorrow’s economy and strengthen public higher education – while saving millions of taxpayer dollars.

 

The Empowerment and Innovation Act will help mitigate the fiscal realities facing SUNY and New York State. Although base collective bargaining and inflationary costs were recognized for the state-operated and statutory colleges, and enrollment growth for the community colleges, funding reductions were necessary given the State’s dire fiscal condition. Full details on this Act are included at the end of this document.

 

OPERATING BUDGET – SUMMARY

 

A summary of the major actions is below. The overall state tax support is $326M or 14.8% less than SUNY’s request, and $52.8M or 2.7% less than the SUNY 2009-10 adjusted base budget. More detailed information for each part of the SUNY budget is provided below the summary.

 

State-Operated and Statutory Colleges

  • $90M (DRP) 2009-10 mid-year reduction made permanent

  • Recognition of collective bargaining, general inflation and energy costs in base

  • Fringe benefits are fully funded

  • Reduction of $117.9M to state operated campuses

  • Reduction of $18.5M to statutory colleges

  • Gap closing” state-wide personal service actions target of $33.5M. The specific actions are yet to be negotiated with the unions; the intent is that any actions taken would fully generate the savings target

  • SUNY income funds (including tuition, general IFR, SUTRA, Hospitals, stabilization, and Restricted Current Fund) are “off-budget”, that is, not appropriated

  • Due to possible bond covenant restrictions, the Residence Hall fund remains appropriated

  • Campus appropriations are a single line, not delineated by sub-object

 

Community Colleges

  • Application of federal stimulus funds increased by $47.9M to $83.3M

  • Recognition of enrollment growth and increased rental aid need

  • $130 per FTE mid year reduction continued for 4th quarter of 2009-10 college fiscal year

  • Additional $285 per FTE reduction brings 2010-11 state fiscal year funding level to $2,260 (covers 1st quarter through 3rd quarter 2010-11 college fiscal year)

  • Chargeback for FIT baccalaureate and masters’ students eliminated

  • Maximum TAP award reduced to $4,000 for associate degrees; no campus is at $4,000 although fourteen campuses are within $500

 

Hospitals

  • Support remains flat

  • Support is now directly appropriated in “Aid to Localities”

  • Impact of possible Medicaid reductions not yet determined

 

TAP

  • Awards reduced by $75

  • Proposed reforms include increased academic standards and tightened eligibility requirements

 

(millions of dollars)

SUNY 2009-10 Adjusted Base

SUNY Budget Request

Executive Budget

Compared to Request

Percent

Compared to Adjusted Base

Percent

State Operated Campuses

976.6

1,082.8

945.5

(137.3)

-12.7%

(31.1)

-3.2%

Statutory Campuses

156.9

162.4

140.8

(21.6)

-13.3%

(16.1)

-10.3%

Total State Operated

$1,133.5

$1,245.2

$1,086.3

($158.9)

-12.7%

($47.2)

-4.2%

Cornell Cooperative Extension

3.9

4.7

3.9

(0.8)

-17.0%

-

0.0%

Hospital Support

128.7

227.8

128.7

(99.1)

-43.5%

-

0.0%

Community Colleges

477.0

521.6

454.4

(67.2)

-12.9%

(22.6)

-4.7%

General State Charges (Fringe Benefits)

190.0

207.0

207.0

-

0.0%

17.0

8.9%

Total

$1,933.1

$2,206.3

$1,880.3

($326.0)

-14.8%

($52.8)

-2.7%

 

 

State Operated Campuses

 

  • The 2009-10 $90M (DRP) mid-year reduction was made permanent

  • Mandatory Costs

    • SUNY requested $89.6M

      • $81.4M for collective bargaining

      • $8.2M for general inflation

      • Mandatory cost request was 9.2% of adjusted 2009-10 base

    • Budget includes $98.4M

      • $81.4M for collective bargaining

      • $8.9M for general inflation

      • $8.1M for energy costs (SUNY did not request additional energy funding)

  • Tuition Share

    • SUNY requested $16.5M for next installment of tuition share

    • Budget includes $16.7M

  • Reduction of $117.9M applied after additions for mandatory costs and tuition share; distribution to campuses and programs to be determined by the Board of Trustees

  • Gap closing” state-wide personal service actions target of $30.9M

    • the specific actions are yet to be negotiated with the unions

    • actions could include a 5-day deferral (“lag”) or a reduction/elimination of the 2010 across-the-board raises

    • also impacts University-wide programs

    • Intent is that any actions taken would fully generate the savings target

  • Net impact

    • Executive budget is $31.1M or 3.2% less than the SUNY 2009-10 adjusted base

    • Executive budget is $137.3 or 12.7% less than SUNY’s request

  • SUNY income funds (tuition, general IFR, SUTRA, Hospitals, Restricted Current Fund) are “off-budget”, that is, not appropriated

  • Tuition Reimbursement” University-wide program now reflects only portions funded by state tax support

  • No other significant changes to University-wide programs

  • Due to possible bond covenant restrictions, the Residence Hall fund remains appropriated

  • Campus appropriations are a single line, not delineated by sub-object

 

 

 

State Operated Campuses

(millions of dollars)

SUNY Budget Request

Executive Budget

Difference

2009-10 Enacted Budget

$1,057.8

$1,057.8

-

DRP

(81.2)

(78.6)

2.6

Adjusted 2009-10 Base

$976.6

$979.2

$2.6

Mandatory Costs

89.7

98.4

8.7

Addition for Tuition Split

16.5

16.7

0.2

2010-11 Base before Reduction

$1,082.8

$1,094.3

$11.5

State Tax Reduction

 

(117.9)

(117.9)

Sub-total

$1,082.8

$976.4

($106.4)

Dollar Change from SUNY Adjusted Base

$106.2

($0.2)

 

Percent Change from SUNY Adjusted Base

10.9%

0.0%

 

To Be Determined Personnel Action

 

(30.9)

(30.9)

2010-11 Executive Budget

$1,082.8

$945.5

($137.3)

Dollar Change from SUNY Adjusted Base

$106.2

($31.1)

 

Percent Change from SUNY Adjusted Base

10.9%

-3.2%

 

 

 

Statutory Colleges (Cornell and Alfred Ceramics)

 

  • The 2009-10 $90M mid-year reduction was made permanent

  • Mandatory Costs

    • SUNY requested $5.5M

      • $5.0M for collective bargaining

      • $0.5M for general inflation

      • Mandatory cost request was 3.5% of adjusted 2009-10 base

    • Budget includes $7.5M

      • $5.0M for collective bargaining

      • $1.4M for general inflation

      • $1.1M for energy costs (SUNY did not request additional energy funding)

  • Tuition share adjustment does not apply to statutory colleges

  • Reduction of $18.5M applied after additions for mandatory costs

  • Gap closing” state-wide personal service actions target of $2.6M

    • the specific actions are yet to be negotiated with the unions

    • actions could include a 5-day deferral (“lag”) or a reduction/elimination of the 2010 across-the-board raises

    • intent is that any actions taken would fully generate the savings target

  • Net impact

    • Executive budget is $16.1M or 10.3% less than SUNY 2009-10 adjusted base

    • Executive budget is $21.6M or 13.3% less than SUNY’s request

 

Statutory Colleges

(millions of dollars)

SUNY Budget Request

Estimated Executive Budget

Difference

2009-10 Enacted Budget

$165.7

$165.7

-

DRP

(8.8)

(11.4)

(2.6)

Adjusted 2009-10 Base

$156.9

$154.3

($2.6)

Mandatory Costs

5.5

7.6

2.1

Addition for Tuition Split

-

-

-

2010-11 Base before Reduction

$162.4

$161.9

($0.5)

State Tax Reduction

 

(18.5)

(18.5)

Sub-total

$162.4

$143.4

($19.0)

Dollar Change from SUNY Adjusted Base

$5.5

($13.5)

 

Percent Change from SUNY Adjusted Base

3.5%

-8.6%

 

To Be Determined Personnel Action

 

(2.6)

(2.6)

2010-11 Executive Budget

$162.4

$140.8

($21.6)

Dollar Change from SUNY Adjusted Base

$5.5

($16.1)

 

Percent Change from SUNY Adjusted Base

3.5%

-10.3%

 

 

 

Community Colleges

 

  • SUNY’s request was adopted prior to enactment of the 2009-10 community college reduction

  • Application of federal stimulus funds increased by $47.9M to $83.3M

  • $130 per FTE mid year reduction continued for 4th quarter of 2009-10 college fiscal year

  • Enrollment Growth

    • SUNY requested $34.0M

    • Budget includes $26.6M (reflects $130 per student reduction)

  • Mandatory Costs

    • SUNY requested $7.0M or $50 per student

    • Not included in budget

  • Categorical Aids

    • SUNY requested $3.6M to fully fund rental and restore other programs

    • Budget includes $3.2M in recognition of increased rental costs

  • Reduction of $40.3M applied

  • Additional $285 per FTE reduction brings 2010-11 state fiscal year funding level to $2,260 (covers 1st quarter through 3rd quarter 2010-11 college fiscal year)

  • Net impact

    • Executive budget is $22.6M or 4.7% less than the SUNY 2009-10 Enacted Budget

    • Executive budget is $67.2M or 12.9% less than SUNY’s request

  • Chargeback for FIT baccalaureate and masters’ students eliminated

  • Maximum TAP aware reduced to $4,000 for associate degrees; no campus is at $4,000 although fourteen campuses are within $500

 

Community Colleges (Includes ARRA)

(millions of dollars)

SUNY Budget Request

Executive Budget

Difference

2009-10 Enacted Budget

$477.0

$477.0

-

DRP

 

(12.0)

(12.0)

Adjusted 2009-10 Base

$477.0

$465.0

($12.0)

Addition for Base Enrollment

34.0

26.5

(7.5)

$50 per student increase to base

7.0

-

(7.0)

Categorical aid increase

3.6

3.2

(0.4)

2010-11 Base before Reduction

$521.6

$494.7

($26.9)

State Tax Reduction

 

(40.3)

(40.3)

Executive Budget for 2010-11

$521.6

$454.4

($67.2)

Dollar Change from SUNY Adjusted Base

$44.6

($22.6)

 

Percent Change from SUNY Adjusted Base

9.4%

-4.7%

 

 

 

 

***

 

Comprehensive Colleges Sector Report (January 29, 2010)

 

The thirteen Comprehensive Colleges have shared their concerns at the UFS winter plenary. We are concerned about the large scale of dynamic changes that may be contained in the Public Higher Education and Innovation Act (PHEEIA).

 

In principle, we support any mechanism, and the legislation that brings it about, when it improves or sustains the quality of education, research, scholarship, our state’s economic vitality and the resulting synergies between our campuses and our communities.

 

Based on our initial reading of PHEEIA we are concerned about several unintended consequences, especially in the domains of differential and rational tuition, land use, mission ‘compression’ upon the Comprehensive Colleges.

 

Tuition

What assurances can you give the Comprehensive Colleges that rational tuition, if enacted, will contain mechanisms that will impede or prohibit further reductions of state support?

 

Public Land Use

What processes will be implemented, beyond the changes being contemplated for the current State Asset Management Board that will ensure the use of those assets directly and largely benefits the mission and students of the individual campus that possesses that resource?

 

Mission ‘Compression’

Several new initiatives, including the SUNY/CUNY Public Higher Education and Innovation Act, the recently improved student transfer and mobility practices, and even more recent General Education revisions will all create new modes of intercampus and inter-sector competition and collaboration. The Comprehensive Colleges, in that strategic niche between Community Colleges and University Centers, are concerned. How will those new modes of change affect the teaching colleges’ missions? What changes should we be prepared to make, and not to make?

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Maria Helena Lima

University Senator