College Senate Bulletin

Bulletin 23
Pages 776 - 790
31 March 2000

Page  Topic
777 Senate Meetings
777 Spring Elections Coming Up
  Message from the Chair
777 Presidential Approval
778-779 April 4 College Senate Meeting

779-784 Executive Committee (16 March)
784-785 Faculty Affairs Committee (14 March)
786-790 Sample Ballots

 There will be a Senate meeting on April 4, to complete the agenda begun at the March 28 meeting.


Correspondence: Becky L. Glass, Department of Sociology, Sturges 122C
E-mail: Phone: 245-5336



Senate Meetings

April 4
April 11
May 2

4:00 pm, Newton 204


Spring Elections

You will receive your ballots for Spring Senate Elections early next week. See sample ballots on pp. 786-790 of this Bulletin.

Teaching Faculty (which includes Librarians) will receive four ballots: 1) Senate Officers, 2) Professional Leave Review Committee & General Education Committee, 3) Senators at Large, 4) Constitutional Amendment. All should be sealed in the envelope marked BALLOT, then sealed in the SIGNATURE envelope, SIGNED, and returned to department secretaries.

Administrative Faculty will receive two ballots: 1) Senate Officers, 2) Constitutional Amendment. Both should be sealed in the envelope marked BALLOT, then sealed in the SIGNATURE envelope, SIGNED, and returned to the ballot box in Erwin 219.


Presidential Approval

President Dahl informed the Senate Chair that he approves the recommendations resulting from the College Senate actions on Feburary 22, 2000.

College Senate Meeting
4 April 2000
4:00 pm


Call to Order

Adoption of Agenda

Reports of the Standing Committees

Undergraduate Curriculum T. Bazzett

First Readings , continued

Program Revisions  
  Childhood Education major (pp. 740-749)
  B.A. or B.S. in Liberal Arts with Certification in Childhood Education (pp. 750-754)
  Childhood Education (with Special Education added) major (pp. 755-765)
  Changes in Concentrations (pp. 766-771)
Undergraduate Academic Policies, Core, and Review B. Gohlman

First Readings

Motion: To accept the Pre-Major Policies for Admission to the E.C. Shear School of Education, as printed in Bulletin p. 775 (See discussions pp. 624-626 and 772-775)

Motion: A standard of proficiency in foreign language at Geneseo shall be defined minimally as:

Proficiency through fourth semester (202), college level of a single language;


Completion of four units (level IV) of NYS high school foreign language or its
out-of-state equivalent;

Other appropriate performance- or competence-based equivalency as approved by the Foreign Language Dept. or other appropriate body.
(See proposal p. 566 and discussion p. 588-589)

Graduate Academic Affairs   Judy Bushnell
Faculty Affairs N. Schiavetti
Student Affairs E. Crosby

Unfinished Business

New Business


Minutes of Senate Executive Committee
March 16, 2000

Present: B. Glass, C. Leary, J. Ballard, N. Schiavetti, B. Gohlman, J. Bushnell,
T. Bazzett, E. Crosby, E. Wallace, A. Gridley, B. Dixon, C. Dahl.

Call To Order: Chair B. Glass called the meeting to order at 12:50 pm.

Adoption of Agenda: The agenda was approved as printed.

Approval of Minutes: The minutes of the Executive Committee Meeting on February 24, 2000, were approved as printed on pp. 618-624 of College Senate Bulletin #20. The minutes of the Executive Committee Meeting on March 2, 2000, were approved as printed on pp. 654-657 of College Senate Bulletin #21. [Editorial note: See Central Council Report below for a correction to a report in the Feb. 24 minutes.]

New Business:

B. Glass called for discussion of a concern raised by the Math Department regarding the possible move of Fraser Library holdings to Milne. The Library Committee of the Math Department was given the task of evaluating the proposal. Because it is useful to have relevant materials located near the departments, Math and the School of Business are reportedly opposed to the move, and the Computer Science Department has not decided. The problems raised by the Math Department are that (1) the library administration appears to be directing the changes rather than consulting with departments, and (2) there is a need for more opportunities to discuss the pros and cons of moving the materials. B. Dixon offered a different perspective, noting that no proposal has been made yet while consultations continue. She stated that the library director has consulted with Computer Sciences and Business, and she understand that reactions to proposed changes were not all negative. The library staff has conducted head counts and surveyed students to determine usage and students preferences. E. Wallace noted that one meeting held with members of the Math Department conveyed the sense that the deal is done. He also reported that Business faculty seem "resigned" to the prospect of moving the library materials, rather than happy about it. B. Dixon reiterated that no proposal had been offered, but that initial suggestions were based on student surveys and head counts indicating that most students use Fraser as a quiet study space. E. Wallace suggested that the question of moving the library materials may be an FAC matter. B. Dixon asked whether space allocation was considered an FAC matter. B. Glass suggested that the Math Department speak with the library director. E. Wallace reported that the department feels they already have, and that he was charged by the department to convey the dissatisfaction of the department faculty. J. Bushnell recounted some of the history of the library locations. Fraser used to be Milne. When the present Milne opened, all holdings were moved to Milne except library science and the children's books. When the Library School was closed in the early 1980s, business, economics, computer science, and math materials were moved to the Fraser branch for space reasons. Proximity of materials to specific departments was not a consideration. In recent times, Fraser has been underused. It is often staffed by students. The long-term plan is to consolidate the library into one facility, which would be more useful for students than having resources spread out. Currently, students may have to travel back and forth for one project. Usage and cost efficiency are the library staff’s concerns. B. Glass noted that Executive Committee is not the best arena to discuss the issues regarding library space, use, etc. She suggested that faculty who were unhappy with a meeting in the department should speak directly with the library director. B. Gohlman added that the eventual consolidation of the library will probably not be a Senate question. J. Bushnell agreed, suggesting that the appropriate "chain of command" would involve seeing the library director and the Provost and President if necessary, rather than bringing the issue to Senate. A. Gridley noted that Executive Committee had previously discussed space allocation for the Blake lounge, and she wondered why this issue was different. E. Wallace noted that the Math Department is concerned about this issue and will pursue other venues for discussion. B. Dixon noted that consultation may not lead to agreement, but emphasized that no plan has been offered yet.

Undergraduate Curriculum Committee (T. Bazzett): T. Bazzett reported that proposals for changes in the School of Education are on their way to Senate. He thanked the Provost for her help in attending the last two marathon meetings. All course proposals have passed UCC. In addition, the four proposals for single certification programs have passed. Of the two dual-certification programs, one passed and one did not. The dual-cert. program in Childhood Education and Special Education, which will satisfy most students seeking dual-certification, passed. The Early Childhood and Childhood Education program, for which there is less clarity about the number of interested students, did not pass. Assoc. Dean S. Bailey has noted that most incoming students are likely to be satisfied with these program options, assuming they pass the Senate. T. Bazzett noted that the first dual-certification program passed by a slim margin. There is no word from SOE about their reaction to the failure of the other program to pass. A. Gridley noted that a wild rumor is circulating among students that there will be no School of Education next year, and she asked for help in dispelling this rumor. T. Bazzett noted that the dual certification programs are similar to prior programs, but have been changed to meet the new State Regulations. T. Bazzett will talk with D. Showers next week about the SOE reaction. He hopes that SOE will modify both the dual-certification programs to satisfy all the concerns. E. Wallace noted that there seemed to be little difference in the dual-cert. program that passed and the one that didn’t. T. Bazzett noted that there are similar concerns about both programs, each of which involved very tight restrictions and requirements for students. One program is a little worse, and UCC concerns center on the possible overlap and duplication across courses. Some believe that requirements could be combined to allow more electives. In the Childhood Education & Special Education program (which passed), there is less opportunity for combining course requirements. C. Dahl noted that this problem presents a difficult situation for us in Senate, where the proposals must be approved, as well as in the College and SOE, where faculty must abide by relatively hasty decisions to meet deadlines. He noted that many people have worked very hard, and he suggested that this situation raises issues about how we have to deal with state mandates on professional programs. He noted further that UCC this year has been a difficult committee to serve on and to chair. B. Glass echoed these thanks to T. Bazzett.

Policy Committee (B. Gohlman): B. Gohlman reported that two proposals will be brought to Senate from the Policy Committee.

    1. A change in the admission requirements for the School of Education will be proposed. These changes were initially proposed by SOE and modified by the Dean’s office.
    2. A Foreign Language requirement of two years (four credits or equivalent) will be proposed. B. Gohlman noted that the discussions at the open forum were fruitful, and that several issues were aired. He also noted that we will indeed have a foreign language requirement of some kind, as required by the Board of Trustees.
    3. A third proposal to allow students to take one core course from their major was rejected by the Policy Committee. This limitation affects the N/, S/, H/, and F/ cores (not the graduation requirements of W/, M/, and R/). The Policy Committee noted that they may wish to revisit this question if the Foreign Language requirement goes to 202 and if American History is added as a requirement.
Faculty Affairs Committee (N. Schiavetti): The committee is completing work on two motions. Committee votes are being collected on these motions. Because the Bulletin deadline can not be met in time for the March meeting, the motions will be offered at the April 11 Senate meeting.

More New Business:

  1. B. Glass requested clarification of procedures to use regarding a request to collect data from Senators for the purpose of research. A researcher received IRB approval to seek survey data from Senators. After brief discussion, it was agreed that B. Glass could distribute the surveys at Senate, asking Senators to return the surveys individually in pre-stamped envelopes.
  2. The Faculty-L moderator has requested clarification regarding the use of the listserver for statements from candidates for Senate positions. One such candidate has sent a message about Senate issues. S. Chichester (CIT) is not opposed to such use if readers are not asked to do something specific (such as vote for a particular person). In discussion, N. Schiavetti suggested that FacTalk-L might be an option. B. Glass reported that both the candidate and the CIT director agree that FacTalk-L is a less formal listserver, which may not be appropriate for this type of use. J. Bushnell noted that it may be useful to have such information prior to elections, and she identified previous examples of such dissemination. N. Schiavetti suggested that the Senate website could make space available for "position statements" and other information from candidates. C. Dahl suggested that it could be helpful to clarify the differences in purposes between FacTalk, Faculty-L, and Events-L. A. Gridley noted that a website would not have the same access as a dedicated listserver. B. Glass noted that only one person seems interested in using Faculty-L for statements related to the Senate election, and that there appear to be no serious concerns about such use. All agreed to recommend allowing the requested message, with the understanding that further discussion of a website option may be needed if a large number of persons wish to use Faculty-L for similar statements.
President’s Report (C. Dahl):
  1. President Dahl reported on the tentative plans for adjusting the schedule of events at the beginning of the Fall semester (given the new academic calendar passed last year). Classes will now begin on Monday, so events that were previously held on that day must be rearranged. The Committee on Orientation (chaired by R. Farquharson and S. Bailey) has recommended some procedures for the Weekend of Welcome (WOW), and has asked for advice from the administration about what other events will occur. For the coming school year, we will try the following. Opening Day department meetings will probably have to be moved to Friday instead of Monday. C. Dahl is exploring with UUP the possibility of co-hosting an all-campus picnic (from about 4:00 to 6:00 p.m.) on Friday, perhaps to include incoming first-year students as part of the WOW. The First-year Student Convocation will be held on Sunday evening, with the talk from a faculty member, and possibly a reception for faculty, serving as an appropriate endpoint for the WOW. The All-College Convocation will probably be held on Tuesday at 4:00 (the regular Senate time, which will hopefully disenfranchise the smallest number of people). Committee and Department Chairs are discussing these scheduling options, and are also considering an "open-house" period in the departments to help students enter the community. C. Dahl asked for comments from Executive Committee members regarding these plans. B. Glass asked whether there is a campus-wide policy that departments must hold meetings on the opening day of classes. N. Schiavetti noted that some departments require this meeting as part of their plan of governance. B. Dixon noted that the practice has been to have meetings on the first day of the first (Fall) semester. Several EC members reminisced about past problems with professors being absent from campus at the start of the semester, and noted good reasons for having a department meeting before classes begin. J. Ballard asked when the meeting for new faculty will be scheduled. B. Dixon reported that the time has not yet been scheduled to allow working around the other scheduled events. C. Dahl noted that having first day activities on Friday may help to free up some time for the new faculty meeting, who could even meet on Thursday afternoon. B. Dixon reported that the schedule will probably be set by the end of this semester to allow printing it in the last Senate bulletin.
  2. C. Dahl also reported on the budget progress in the legislature. No one appears to be trying to get rid of the $80 million, and both houses appear to be asking to add more money to the Budget. Both want to add to TAP, but it is unclear how much support there is for these efforts. A more troubling issue is a bill before the Assembly. This bill proposes a cap on fees of 10% of the total tuition. The idea is to protect students from unreasonable fees, but the bill would result in a major budget cut for Geneseo, with resulting cuts in services for students. For example, if the student health fee is cut, it might not be possible to provide 24-hour coverage. A cut in the athletic fee might preclude support for the 19 campus teams. Without the technology fee, we probably could not continue to replace the computers in the public labs or provide technical support in the departments. Instead, we might have to require students to come in with a specific computer (for which the residence halls are wired). Unfortunately, this apparently helpful bill represents a "cut" in funding from the legislature. CUNY schools are not involved. It may be that the legislators recognize that fees are used to make up for bad budgets, and they may be trying to pressure the BOT to prepare more reasonable budgets. A. Gridley asked whether it was the case that Geneseo currently charges fees of around 12% of tuition. C. Dahl replied that it was closer to 15 to 18%.
Provost’s Report (B. Dixon): No report.

Vice-Chair's Report (C. Leary): No report.

Treasurer's Report (M. Mohan): No report.

Central Council Report (A. Gridley):

  1. A. Gridley noted that the Central Council report at the Feb. 24th Executive Committee meeting incorrectly identified R. Bonfiglio as a member of the committee formed to examine space needs for student socializing. The committee includes Keith Barnes and Kyle Carter. The committee will make its report to Dr. Bonfiglio.
  2. A. Gridley announced the availability of Student Association Merit Awards (co-sponsored by the Geneseo Foundation). The deadline has been extended for applications, which should include an application form, a short essay, and two recommendations. Nineteen awards are available in the areas of Leadership, Service, and Diversity. Students with a minimum GPA of 2.9 may qualify for one of six $1000 awards (two in each of the three categories). An additional 13 awards of $500 (across all three categories) require no specific GPA minimum.
Graduate Affairs Committee (J. Bushnell): No report.

Student Affairs Committee (E. Crosby): The committee will meet at 4:00 p.m. on April 4th to discuss the possibility of a pedestrian escort service on campus.

Chair’s Report (B. Glass): B. Glass called for discussion on two items.

1. Should cake and coffee/tea be provided at the final Senate meeting of the year (at a cost of about $120)? Executive Committee members agreed to do so.

2. Who votes for what during Spring elections? Students have questioned the wording in Article 13 of the Constitution, which states that "faculty" vote on amendments to the constitution. B. Glass reported that she has examined the issue and found that the statement is not a typographical error. Because the Constitution is that of the Faculty Senate, only Faculty Senators can vote on changes to it. A. Gridley asked how students could participate in changes in they cannot offer or vote on amendments. B. Glass suggested that students could request a discussion of the question in SAC.

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 1:55 pm.

Respectfully submitted,

Joan C. Ballard
Secretary of the College Senate