Much of the business at this Senate meeting was rather routine, so I will merely summarize the most important and interesting items. Then I will move on to two major items that were considered at this meeting, both of which were regarded as so urgent that First Readings were waived.
Chair Jeffrey Reeder reported that all CSU International Programs have been canceled for the entire ’20-’21 academic year. However, remaining optimistic, the CSU is moving ahead with plans to reopen the International Programs in the ’21-’22 academic year. All students who were accepted into the program for this year will be eligible to defer participation to the following year. New applications are being accepted as well.
Chair Reeder announced that he has been selected to direct the IP in Spain for the ’21-’22 AY and will be moving to Madrid next summer.
President Judy Sakaki spoke about progress on the Graduation Initiative, which has established targets for graduation rates to be met by 2025. All CSU campuses have been rated on 6 measures of progress. Sonoma still has some work to do. Two campuses, Fullerton and San Marcos, have fully achieved their goals.
CEO Joyce Lopes noted that the CBA (Collective Bargaining Agreement) is in effect even during emergencies.
VP for Student Affairs Greg Sawyer reported on expectations for on-campus housing and dining during the spring term. He also mentioned that contingency plans have been developed to deal with any significant protests that may ensue from the results of the forthcoming election.
Statewide Senators Wendy Ostroff and Richard Senghas reported on 1) discussion of the effectiveness and appropriateness of SETEs, 2) on-line chats with the Faculty Trustee; and 3) questions from some campuses whether policies for revocation of emeritus status are admissible (SSU has no such policy, but some campuses do).
AB 1460 Implementation (Ethnic Studies Requirement)
The State Legislature approved a bill (AB 1460) that was signed into law in August by Governor Newsom, requiring students to meet an Ethnic Studies requirement before graduating from the CSU. The Chancellor’s Office recently issued some peremptory regulations on the implementation of this law. Several campus Senates took great exception to the Chancellor’s directives since they intrude on the faculty’s authority over curriculum, which is in effect our share of Shared Governance. All seven Senates passed strongly worded resolutions objecting to the Chancellor’s interference in curriculum. The SSU Academic Senate today passed a similar Resolution, after waiving the First Reading. There were a few minor amendments, but the Resolution was essentially passed as submitted.
The Resolution and the Rationale for it (which the Senate voted to include in the Resolution) are appended below.
Harassment of Faculty by Political Groups, Attack on Academic Freedom
In our current highly polarized political environment, there are groups that have thrown out the rules of decorum and respect to freedom of speech, and have resorted to threats and intimidation of faculty expressing opinions which these groups disapprove of. These threats have actually led to violence and even, in one well-publicized case in France, a beheading. Faculty who are well-known to the public and whose work reaches a wide non-academic audience are particularly at risk.
The Senate, after waiving the First Reading on grounds of urgency, passed a Resolution regarding this matter, the text of which is attached. The Senate did not include the Rationale with the Resolution. There was some objection to the material shown in strike-out type because it unnecessarily singles out groups on a particular side of the political spectrum and therefore might well inflame the very behavior it seeks to condemn. Since the Senate chose not to include the Rationale with the Resolution, it was deemed unnecessary to eliminate this language.
FYI, I objected to omitting the Rationale, and in any case would have stricken the partisan language on the grounds that, even if the Rationale is not officially included with the Resolution, it will accompany the Resolution and be widely read.
>> Submitted by Rick Luttmann, Senate Representative for SSU-ERFSA
Sonoma State University Academic Senate Resolution in Opposition to the Chancellor’s Office (CO) Proposed Implementation of AB 1460 (Ethnic Studies)
RESOLVED, that the Sonoma State University (SSU) Academic Senate stand in opposition to the CSU Chancellor’s Office interpretation of AB 1460, which requires the creation of a new General Education Area F Ethnic Studies 3-unit requirement and a simultaneous reduction in Area D units, specifically D-3; and be it further resolved
RESOLVED, that the SSU Academic Senate ask the Board of Trustees to rescind their Title V July 2020 changes; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the SSU Academic Senate ask that the leadership of the Academic Senate CSU (ASCSU) and the Chancellor’s Office rescind their acceptance of the Ethnic Studies core competencies until the CSU Council on Ethnic Studies (CSUCES) has met with CSU Ethnic Studies Department or Program experts, to discuss, vet, and officially approve the proposed Student Learning Outcomes (core competencies) and until there has been authentic collaboration among the CSUES, the ASCSU, and the Chancellor’s Office about the competencies as required by AB 1460; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the SSU Academic Senate endorse the suggestion of several of our sibling campus senates that the timeline for implementation of the requirement be extended to allow for effective and genuine collaboration between the CO, ASCSU, CSUCES, and Ethnic Studies faculty as defined by AB 1460, and to provide sufficient time for an effective transition that meets the spirit and provisions of the bill; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the SSU Academic Senate strongly urge that campuses be given autonomy in the implementation of AB 1460 in order to consult with campus shared governance bodies and Ethnic Studies faculty about the most appropriate way to implement the requirement for each campus; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the SSU Academic Senate propose that, consistent with campus autonomy, campuses be free to structure the requirement to allow students the flexibility to meet the Ethnic Studies requirement with either lower-division or upper-division courses; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the SSU Academic Senate assert that campuses should be trusted to take into consideration the important issues of time to degree and the transferability of requirements across institutions that is so crucial to the timely completion of degree for all students in the CSU, especially those in majors with limited flexibility because of high unit requirements; and be it further
RESOLVED, that the SSU Academic Senate extend our thanks to the Northridge, San Francisco, San Marcos, Monterey Bay, Humboldt, Pomona, and Stanislaus campus senates for their templates for this resolution; and be it further
RESOLVED, that this resolution be distributed to Chancellor White, Executive Vice Chancellor Student and Academic Affairs Blanchard, the CSU Board of Trustees, ASCSU Chair, CSU Council on Ethnic Studies, Council of Academic Senate Chairs, SSU Deans and Department Chairs, and the SSU Council on Ethnic Studies.
Rationale
Governor Newsom signed AB 1460 into law on August 17, 2020, providing an explicit pathway for an Ethnic Studies requirement in the CSU.* Anticipating the Governor’s signature on the bill, in May 2020 the Chancellor’s Office proposed to the CSU Board of Trustees a new General Education Area F 3-unit requirement in Ethnic Studies and Social Justice and a simultaneous reduction of Area D by 3 units. The Board of Trustees approved said proposal at their July 2020 meeting. After the Governor signed AB 1460, the Chancellor’s Office proposed an amendment to the new Title V Area F language to remove “and Social Justice”, which is before the Board of Trustees as an action item at their November 2020 meeting. In addition, the Chancellor’s office issued a memo on September 10, 2020 outlining a restrictive timeline for implementation of AB 1460 and general parameters for the requirement. On October 8, 2020, the Chancellor’s Office issued draft changes to EO 1100 proposing the new General Education requirement be structured by moving 3 units from GE Area D to the new Area F and mandating that the new requirement be met by Ethnic Studies or Ethnic Studies cross-listed courses.
AB 1460 does not specify that the Ethnic Studies requirement be in General Education nor whether it be met with be an upper- or lower-division course. Campus faculty are the experts in designing and executing curriculum, and our Ethnic Studies faculty across departments are experts in the discipline. Furthermore, the Chancellor’s Office interpretation of AB 1460 would necessitate substantial impacts to many programs at Sonoma State University, requiring time to consider and address those impacts. The Chancellor's Office has created an impossible timeline to ensure appropriate consultation, deliberation, and conversation with constituent groups on how to design and implement the requirement as is most appropriate for each campus. In addition, many CSU campuses experienced tumultuous changes in GE in due to E.O. 1100 Revised. And all campuses are also currently constrained by contingent emergencies including, but not limited to, the COVID-19 global pandemic, wildfires and other climate-based natural disasters, and the national economic downturn affecting state allocations to the CSU. We therefore join the Northridge, San Francisco, San Marcos, Monterey Bay, Humboldt, Pomona, and Stanislaus senates in opposing the Chancellor’s Office plan to implement AB 1460, and recommend that campuses retain the autonomy to implement the new Ethnic Studies requirement consistent with the provisions of AB 1460 in a way most appropriate for their unique circumstances.
*AB 1460 stipulates the following be added to the Education Code: SEC. 2. Section 89032 is added to the Education Code, to read: 89032.
(a) It is the intent of the Legislature that students of the California State University acquire the knowledge and skills that will help them comprehend the diversity and social justice history of the United States and of the society in which they live to enable them to contribute to that society as responsible and constructive citizens.
(b) Commencing with the 2021–22 academic year, the California State University shall provide for courses in ethnic studies at each of its campuses.
(c) The California State University shall collaborate with the California State University Council on Ethnic Studies and the Academic Senate of the California State University to develop core competencies to be achieved by students who complete an ethnic studies course pursuant to implementation of this section. The council and the academic senate shall approve the core competencies before commencement of the 2021–22 academic year.
(d) Commencing with students graduating in the 2024–25 academic year, the California State University shall require, as an undergraduate graduation requirement, the completion of, at minimum, one three-unit course in ethnic studies. The university shall not increase the number of units required to graduate from the university with a baccalaureate degree by the enforcement of this requirement. This graduation requirement shall not apply to a postbaccalaureate student who is enrolled in a baccalaureate degree program at the university if the student has satisfied either of the following:
(1) The student has earned a baccalaureate degree from an institution accredited by a regional accrediting agency.
(2) The student has completed an ethnic studies course at a postsecondary educational institution accredited by a regional accrediting agency.
Response to Targeted Harassment of Faculty by Online Groups
(This resolution has been endorsed by the Academic Freedom Subcommittee.)
Resolved: that the Sonoma State University (SSU) Academic Senate reaffirm those principles outlined in the University policy on “academic freedom” (Policy #2008-6); and be it further
Resolved: that the SSU Academic Senate acknowledge that online harassment is a real problem that can have consequences on lives and livelihoods, and condemns the targeted harassment of faculty exercising their rights and responsibilities under the Faculty Bill of Rights; and be it further
Resolved: that the SSU Academic Senate call on the Provost to develop a standing plan for response to targeted online harassment that calls for the faculty member to be informed that Academic Affairs has been made aware of the harassment and intends to work with the targeted faculty member; and be it further
Resolved: that the SSU Academic Senate strongly recommend the administration and staff of Strategic Communications develop a standing plan for response to targeted harassment of faculty online, tailored for each of SSU’s social media platforms, which includes speaking out promptly, clearly, and forcefully in defense of academic freedom when any targeting occurs; and be it further
Resolved: that the relevant committees and subcommittees of faculty governance, and the SSU CFA representatives, be meaningfully included in the development of any standing plans relevant to responding to the targeted harassment of faculty online; and be it further
Resolved: that the SSU Academic Senate urge Faculty Affairs to summarize for the Senate a plan of response to targeted harassment of faculty based on best practices at other institutions; and be it further
Resolved: that the SSU Academic Senate call for the AVP of Information Technology and the director of the Center for Teaching & Educational Technology to collaborate to take inventory of risks relevant to targeted harassment of faculty online; to adopt “safe default” settings in tools for online instruction, without reducing their functionality, with the goal of helping to prevent accidental dissemination of video and other materials to unauthorized third-parties; and to develop guidance to help faculty reduce their exposure to the risk of surreptitious and unauthorized recording of classroom materials, classroom discourse, and private meetings between students and faculty; and be it further
Resolved: that the SSU Academic Senate request that plans and actions taken in response to this resolution be completed by Spring 2021 and to be reviewed by the SSU Academic Senate, upon that deadline and annually thereafter; and be it further
Resolved: that this resolution be distributed to all relevant members of the SSU community, including President, Interim Provost, Chief of Staff, AVP of Strategic Communications, Academic Deans, and Department Chairs, the SSU CFA representatives, directly to all faculty, and be made available on the SSU website for all other community members to review.
Rationale
A number of faculty across the country have been targeted recently for online harassment, as documented by AAUP and other organizations. Together these cases suggest that colleges and universities must be proactive in protecting academic freedom in a digitally networked age. This is particularly relevant in an era of remote instruction, where the opportunities for taking material out of context are extensive. To date, Sonoma State University has no policy or published protocols to guard its faculty against possible harassment, nor made a clear commitment supporting faculty if they come under attack.
As is becoming increasingly clear, the 2020 election cycle and various political crises of the past year have exacerbated a political climate that was already ill-disposed to academic freedom. Targeted, organized attacks by conservative student groups, including but not limited to, Turning Point USA and Campus Reform, on faculty accused of “liberal” or “radical” bias have been pervasive since at least 2016. In recent months, those attacks have been scaling up both in terms of scope and intensity. Faculty are placed on watch lists, harassed on social media, and personally threatened. The ongoing and new efforts by individuals and/or groups to monitor the conduct of faculty members have amplified our concerns about the implications for academic freedom.
According to the June 2017 issue of Inside Higher Ed, “The expanding use of social media by academics at a time of growing national political polarization means that activist scholars face new, unforeseen risks. A 2013 survey found 70 percent of faculty use social media for personal reasons at least monthly, while 55 percent use it specifically for professional use at least monthly. People who take stands on controversial issues, particularly if they’re members of marginalized groups, are more likely to be subjected to scrutiny and even, at times, intimidation. By and large, college and university administrators are not prepared for these new challenges.”
These concerns are further exacerbated in the era of remote learning, and particularly during a contentious national election cycle, where increasing political polarization means that faculty who express political views in their own private spheres and/or who research or teach content that is perceived—correctly or not—as perpetuating political viewpoints are sometimes faced with profound external pressures to modify course content or silence their own voice for fear of retaliation. To any extent that a faculty member has modified their course content or held back from speaking about a topic of relevance in a course because of anticipated or existing pressure from individuals or groups, academic freedom is under threat.