Faculty Chair Lauren Morimoto began her report with notice of the sudden and untimely death the previous Saturday of Mathematics Professor André Minor in his late 30’s. She discussed the steps the University is taking to deal with the trauma many may be feeling, including students in his classes. CAPS staff will be visiting each class.
André was born and raised at his family’s vineyard in the mountains between Sonoma and Napa Counties. He earned a bachelor’s degree in mathematics from U C Berkeley and thereafter a doctorate in mathematics at U C San Diego. He has been a Lecturer in Mathematics at SSU for about a decade. Although fully qualified to be a tenure-track faculty member, he chose to remain a Lecturer so that he could devote time to taking over the management of his family’s vineyard from his father. Tragedy struck in 2017 when fire swept through his property and destroyed everything – home, vines, wine-making building, storage. His death Saturday occurred as a result of an accident with machinery. He is survived by his wife Tina and their 2-month-old daughter Maisie. A GoFundMe site has been set up to receive donations for the support of his surviving family: https://gofundme/58f94229. A memorial service will be held on Saturday 11 March at the winery – details to follow.
Chair Morimoto commented favorably on the program “Black Voices” which the University held in early February to celebrate Black History Month.
She then reported at length on the recent statewide meeting of campus Chairs.
- Many campuses are also experiencing enrollment and budgetary crises, although we seem to be in the worst shape.
- There was discussion about the compact with the Governor regarding enrollment growth. The demographics of the State are changing, and this may make it impossible to achieve the targets for increasing enrollment.
- The search for a new permanent Chancellor continues. There is widespread sentiment that Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion should be major themes of the new Chancellorship. Chairs believe an open process should be followed, i.e., names of candidates should be made public, but the Trustees are adamantly opposed.
- A salary study will be released shortly, which is expected to confirm that CSU faculty are significantly underpaid. But due to fiscal restraints on the State’s budget the study will probably have little effect.
President Mike Lee gave his report:
- He has been “cocooned” in his dorm room for a week due to contracting CoVid.
- In better news, he reported that there was a gratifyingly high 96% return rate of students from fall (‘22) to spring (’23), and additionally we had 380 new in-transfers.
- “We’re doing the right thing” as graduate rates increase and time-to-degree shortens. But our very success exacerbates our problem of replacing those graduates each year.
- In a recent meeting with other CSU Presidents, he learned that SSU is highly regarded by them for its public liberal-arts character (and COPLAC membership).
- They all agreed that the traditional model for funding higher education is growing obsolete as our society changes, and must be re-thought.
Provost Karen Moranski reported:
- Mixers for graduate students to socialize have been reinstated as the pandemic subsides. They are held at Overlook, in the Student Center.
- The Academic Master Plan continues development, with the Liberal Arts group already reporting.
- The search for a Dean for the School of International Programs etc (EIEIO) has been canceled. The School will be contracting significantly as the Summer School program moves to state support. Instead of a Dean it will have an Executive Director, and for the time being Dean of the Library Karen Schneider will assume these duties as an overload.
Vice Chair Bryan Burton reported on campus safety concerns. He has been in conversation with the Chief of Police. Shootings on campuses have become increasingly common and understandably many members of the campus community are concerned for their safety. A survey will shortly be done to assess the extent of these concerns and solicit ideas for assuaging them. The campus police are creating a plan to deal with an active shooter on campus.
There is concern among many on campus that our buildings are “too accessible”. Perhaps there should be more and better locks, and buildings locked more than they are. Apparently there is a particular concern in the newly remodeled and reopened Adlai Stevenson Hall, where the lock situation is still shaking out. Emergency lighting in the event of a power failure is another significant concern.
These issues may have a deleterious effect on recruiting if not addressed adequately. Students, and their parents, are naturally concerned about safety on campus. Whatever we decide to do should be widely publicized. Meantime, Vice Chair Burton reminded faculty, students being recruited, and their parents, really like to see classrooms in action, so faculty are encouraged to open their classes to visitors.
Considerable time was spent discussing the question of whether to hold Senate (and other faculty governance bodies) meetings in-person or by zoom (or as a hybrid of the two, though that rarely works out well for either group). The Senate had voted last year, at the (apparently persuasive!) suggestion of then-Analyst Laurel Holmström, to hold Senate meetings exclusively by zoom during the current academic year – for reasons entirely separate from pandemic concerns. Some faculty are in favor of including socializing as part of the Senate’s business. It was suggested that to assuage concerns about a lack of opportunities for personal engagement, “Fridays at Four” or something similar should be resurrected. Ironically, the capacity of zoom meetings to afford at least some personal interaction via video portraits is not widely availed. At one point in this meeting, for instance, while 50 people were on zoom, only 20 had their videos on; the rest were hiding behind still photos or even just their names.
There was discussion about whether the Senate should mandate the form of meetings for committees, but the consensus was that committees should be free to make their own determinations. However, there was also sentiment that once decided for an academic year it should not be changed during that year, since members may schedule their lives around one form or another of attendance. Committees should report to the Senate office what they have decided. Committee meetings are typically open to the public but attendance at zoom meetings by non-members should be available only by getting the code from the Senate office, and that only with permission of the Committee chair. Despite all this discussion, no formal action was taken to establish any of this as Senate policy.
A motion was made to hold all Senate meetings in the 2023-24 academic year in hybrid form. Then a motion was made to amend to require that the first and penultimate meetings of each term be in-person only. The vote to accept the amended motion for discussion was 11 to 9. Then after further discussion the amended motion was adopted 11 to 8.
The rest of the meeting was devoted to a discussion of a proposal known as “Seawolf Bundles”, a project being supervised by Neil Markley, who was present at this meeting to answer questions and address concerns. “Seawolf Bundles” is a mechanism to reduce both the cost and the uncertainty for students to acquire books and other materials needed for their courses. Students would be permitted to “opt out”, but those in the program would be charged $18.50 per unit when they pay their other fees, and for that they would get all materials needed for any of their courses (on a rental basis, not ownership – materials would have to be returned at the end of the term). Such a program is already in place at U C Davis and San Diego State, and it is being introduced also at Pomona. The SSU proposal has the endorsement of the Associated Students.
Needless to say, there were many questions from Senators about the proposal, most of which could not be answered definitively since the program is still in gestation. Questions such as how students will become informed enough to decide whether to opt out, and whether opting in or out could be done at any time. There were concerns about the academic freedom rights of lecturers who may not get their assignments until just before instruction begins. There were questions about how the price of $18.50 per unit was determined. There was an interesting speech about “moral hazard” by an Economics faculty member, who pointed out that students anticipating high costs for materials would be motivated to stay in the program, but students anticipating less or no expense for books would opt out – one effect of which would be to raise the overall cost of the program. A similar moral hazard – in reverse – might apply to instructors as they mull over their choice of books. Exhortations to act “for the greater good” might be able to reduce this effect. Markley claims the program would surely save students money “on average”, but the chief selling point, he believes, is removing uncertainty about how much extra expense will be incurred each term for books.
-- Submitted by Rick Luttmann