2009-2010 University Senate Executive Committee
March 22, 2010
R. Michael Range, Chair
MINUTES
Present: Heidi Andrade, James Castracane, Richard Collier, John Delano, Nicholas Fahrenkopf, Laurence
Kranich, William Lanford, Eric Lifshin, John Monfasani, Gwen Moore, Susan Phillips, Michael
Range, Carlos Rodriguez. Joan Savitt, Daniel Smith, Daniel White
Guests:
Stephen North, Malcolm Sherman, Edelgard Wulfert
The meeting convened at 3:30 pm.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of February 22 were approved with minor changes.
PRESIDENT’S REPORT by SUSAN PHILLIPS
Provost Phillips provided the report for President Philip in his absence.
The State Senate introduced a resolution yesterday that would give SUNY campuses flexibility on rational
tuition and procurements. However, only SUNY Buffalo and Stony Brook will be afforded the differential
tuition and public-private partnerships. The State Assembly has not yet acted on this. The Executive Budget
would mean a $137 million reduction to the SUNY budget which translates into and additional 5% reduction for
UAlbany for this year. Additional reductions are expected for next year as well and could result in a 10%
reduction over the next two years. Additional strain will be added to our budget with the loss of stimulus
funds. There does not appear to be any restoration of state funds in the future.
Chancellor Zimpher’s Strategic Plan will be announced on April 12 in New York City, and then in Albany on
April 13. Part of her initiative includes a K-16 pipeline conversation that embraces the educational concept
from pre-school through graduate school.
The Middle States team visit concluded with successful results. The team recognized the turbulent times the
campus has been through over the past five years and provided positive recognition on many fronts. They gave
praise to and recognition of who we are what we have accomplished. A written report is expected in about two
weeks.
President Philip’s report reiterated his support for a functions and services model as it relates to the evaluation
of administrators. The President’s report also provided an update on the misconduct policy which stated the
policy continues to be reviewed by University Legal Counsel.
Given the forecast for the budget situation, President Philip has been putting together a final budget advisory
group and will be contacting Governance Council for swift action to incorporate individuals into the BAG.
The group will review the proposed budget reduction plan and provide input on how the University will be able
to proceed with downsizing.
SUNY Senator Daniel White inquired as to whether UAlbany was experiencing repercussions for not making a
supportive statement on the HEEIA legislation, since Buffalo and Stony Brook seem to be benefiting from their
statements. The Provost believed that it could be attributed to the UB2020 legislation that Buffalo enacted and
the Buffalo/Stony Brook alliance.
The Provost was asked to talk further about the Chancellor’s notion of an educational pipeline. The Chancellor
envisions an educational system beginning with early childhood education and extending beyond the years
when a student graduates from college. The process identifies the many leaks in the pipeline that contribute to
the dropout rate at the high school level. The model the Chancellor envisions being created on SUNY
campuses would include a coalition of communities in the pipeline, making sure each child is ready and
prepared to go through all of the steps in their educational journey. The plan would be resource neutral.
UNIVERSITY SENATE CHAIR’S REPORT – R. MICHAEL RANGE, CHAIR
Spring Faculty Meeting. The meeting will be on Monday, April 19, 2010 at 3pm, with refreshments and informal conversations
beginning at 2:30pm. The main agenda item is President Philip’s report to the faculty.
GOV Chair Lifshin and Chair Range met with President Philip on March 8, 2010 to discuss the following items.
a) Revisions of Misconduct Policy. CERS has completed its review of revisions proposed by the CERS-GOV working group and
plans to introduce the revised policy at the next senate meeting. Much of the current draft has been reviewed by the university counsel,
but some items are still pending. The President agreed to urge counsel to complete his review in a timely manner.
b) Charter Amendments. The discussion confirmed differences in perspectives regarding the graduate course and IRCUAP
amendments. President Philip is not willing to approve them, but he is aware of governance’s reading of BOT Policies that stipulations
in the bylaws or charter that do NOT involve consultation with the President do not require the President’s approval. He has no
objections that the relevant amendments approved by the senate be included in the charter, as long as it is understood that the
President did NOT approve them. A resolution of the different interpretations of BOT policies will be deferred until the issue comes to
the forefront with a specific proposal requiring application of either one of the amendments.
c) Review and Evaluation of Administrators. The rationale and merits for such an evaluation process were discussed with President
Philip. The President summarized his concerns at the subsequent meeting of the Senate. The Senate’s discussion of the resolution on
evaluation of administrators was terminated by a call for a quorum. The SEC will review the situation at the 3/22/2010 meeting and
will consider possible revisions of the resolution in light of the Senate discussion.
Chair Range informed SEC members that the order of the agenda had changed due to the number of items that would
require substantial discussion. Since the councils have already submitted written reports, they are on record. The new
agenda order will not be the standard procedure.
Chair Range read a prepared statement in response to that which was given by CNSE Faculty Chair, Tim Groves at the
UPPC meeting on Friday, March 12. Chair Grove’s statement is included at the end of the UPPC report submitted by
Chair Delano and included in these minutes. Chair Range’s statement reads as follows:
The term “fiscal autonomy” does not appear in the April 20, 2004 Board of Trustees Resolution. The relevant text reads:
“Resolved, that the State University of New York hereby establishes the College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering as
an academic unit within the University at Albany-SUNY headed by a Vice-President……”
The December 16, 2004 MOU between Interim President Ryan and Vice President Kaloyeros uses the term “Budgetary
Autonomy” in the heading for item III. However, the relevant subsection III.1 does not establish “budgetary autonomy”
or “fiscal autonomy” of CNSE separately from UAlbany. The actual text reads: “Establish the budget of CNSE as a
separate and stand alone line item within the UAlbany campus budget that is not subject to oversight by the University
Senate or Senate councils and committees.” (Emphasis added)
This MOU, and in particular the quoted text, was never discussed or approved by the UAlbany Senate or by any of its
councils or committees. Removal of UAlbany Senate oversight appears to be inconsistent with the Bylaws of UAlbany,
Article I.2.2.3:
"2.2.3. The Faculty shall provide ongoing consultation on institution-wide budget or business initiatives that affect the
teaching, research, or service programs of the University. Detailed annual reports shall be provided on actual budget
expenditures."
The “fiscal autonomy” of CNSE from UAlbany was established by the November 18, 2008 SUNY BOT Resolution.
2
UFS (UNIVERSITY FACULTY SENATOR’S REPORT) – WILLIAM LANFORD & DANIEL D.
WHITE, SUNY SENATORS
The SUNY University Faculty Senate (UFS) has been considering the “Empowerment Act” which has now taken the acronym
PHEEIA (Public Higher Education Empowerment and Innovation Act). In mid-March, UFS President Ken O’Brien circulated a grid
containing bullet points on the following elements of PHEEIA: Tuition Policy and Financing, Land Use, Public-Private Partnerships,
Operating Efficiencies, Hospital Reforms, Procurement Efficiencies. The grid included information from SUNY Administration,
UUP, and a general summary by the UFS leadership. This document is available on demand from Senator White.
On March 16, 2010, UFS President O’Brien held a conference call with approximately 30 UFS Senators and Campus Governance
Leaders. Chair Range participated. Two resolutions from the Chancellor were circulated before the meeting (RESOLUTION
ESTABLISHING A COMPREHENSIVE TUITION POLICY FOR THE 64 CAMPUS SUNY SYSTEM and RESOLUTION
ESTABLISHING A COMPREHENSIVE ASSET MANAGEMENT POLICY). These resolutions and PHEEIA were discussed in
detail. The meeting resulted in a letter from the UFS President O’Brien to Chancellor Zimpher and Senior Vice Chancellor Rimai on
behalf of the UFS.
In brief, the letter expressed support for SUNY controlling the General Tuition Rate and a strong desire for the State of New York to
commit to supporting SUNY financially. The letter also expressed concern for the Special Tuition Rate proposal and the lack of a
substantive role for faculty governance in both resolutions. These resolutions were circulated by Chair Range to the UAlbany SEC and
the letter from Ken O’Brien to the Chancellor is available on demand from Senator White.
GSO (GRADUATE STUDENT ORGANIZATION) – NICHOLAS FAHRENKOPF, GSO
REPRESENTATIVE
Nothing to report.
SA (STUDENT ASSOCIATION) – DUSTIN LANTERMAN, ACADEMIC AFFAIRS DIRECTOR, SA
The spring 2010 edition of the World Within Reach Speaker Series will feature Howard Dean and Karl Rove, discussing the important
issues of today’s world. 8:00 p.m. Thursday, April 8th, 2010 in the SEFCU Arena Doors open at 6:45 p.m.; must be seated by 7:30
p.m. REGISTER at www.albany.edu/speakerseries
MSCHE STEERING COMMITTEE REPORT – REED HOYT, UNIVERSITY SENATE
REPRESENTATIVE
The Middle States Commission Visiting Team met with the Steering Committee and other University officials on Sunday, 15 March.
Due to my teaching schedule I was unable to meet with the Steering Committee and the Team on Monday 16 March. The final session
with the team took place on Wednesday, 17 March as a wrap-up open to Senior Staff, Deans, University Council, Senate Executive
Committee, some Alumni Association representatives, key Student Leaders, and all the people who participated in the preparation of
the self-study.
On Sunday the MSCHE Team was introduced, though some of them were unavailable due to travel problems caused by the storm on
the East Coast. Dr. Langenberg and others appraised the Self-Study as comprehensive and honest in its assessments of the campus.
The team consisted of the following:
Donald N. Langenberg
(Chair) Chancellor Emeritus and Professor of Physics and Electrical Engineering, University of
Maryland, College Park
John E. Benhart
Professor and Chair, Department of Geography and Regional Planning
Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Harding Faulk, Jr.
Director, Institutional Research, Cheyney University of Pennsylvania
Charles J. Fey
Vice President for Student Affairs, University of Akron
Nina D. Jemmott
Associate Vice President & Dean, Graduate Studies, William Paterson University of New Jersey
Henry A. Mauermeyer
Senior Vice President for Administration and Treasurer, New Jersey Institute of Technology
Stella Porto
Program Director/Collegiate Professor, University of Maryland, College Park
Linda B. Salamon
Professor of English and Human Sciences, George Washington University
Working with them:
Elizabeth Bringsjord
Associate Provost, Academic Programs, Planning, and Assessment, State University of New
York
On Wednesday the summary statements by Dr. Langenberg and others from the team echoed those assessments and added the
following, in no particular order:
•Despite the turnover in administration the campus is doing well.
•Faculty Development is an issue that needs further attention.
•UAlbany is further along than many in its view that students are central to its mission. The Student Success program was
favorably regarded.
•The notion of assessment needs further refinement. Are we teaching students what they should learn and how well they are
learning it? Offices and services also need to be assessed and some appear not to have been. “Closing the loop” on feedback
was stressed so the community can appreciate that assessment efforts are having a positive effect.
3
•The faculty needs to be aware of technological changes, the most radical since the invention of the printed book. In general
the faculty needs to be adaptable, both in terms of utilizing technology (e.g. distance learning) and in the way they think
about their disciplines. A question regarding humanities prompted a comment that certain areas should think about forming
new groups that would cut across traditional disciplines.
•Research on the campus is strong, as exemplified by the increase in external funding, while acknowledging that some areas
will not draw in large amounts of funding. CNSE has progressed far above comparable units in other institutions. A relatively
new area of research worth exploring is pedagogy within the discipline.
•Fundraising—everyone needs to be involved in fundraising, including individual faculty in some instances.
•More contact and involvement with alumni should be fostered.
•The role of governance here is quite typical.
•Facilities are actually better here than is the case in many places. (He was not more specific than that.)
•The strategic plan is well underway and is on the right track. The MSCHE report should help in the formulation of the
strategic plan. Although the process of identifying aspirational peers is useful and necessary, the university should try to
understand better what its identity should be.
OTHER REPORTS
CAA (Council on Academic Assessment) – Heidi Andrade, Chair
The Council on Academic Assessment met on March 10, 2010. The Chair updated the other members on the progress of the GAC’s
plans to review the CAA assessment reports, and on Dr. Hedberg’s response to our request for the addition of assessment-related
language to the “Administrative Procedures for the Preparation of Recommendations for Promotions and Continuing Appointment”
document. The Chair also introduced Ruth Scipione, a guest at our meetings in place of Dr. Bill Roberson; Dr. Roberson will be
available to attend CAA meetings upon request. The chairs of the Program Review and the General Education Assessment Committee
provided updates: The PRC will have drafts of its reviews of assessment reports this month, and the GEAC is meeting with faculty
and staff from University in the High School this week. The committee revised and approved a memo to the Provost about the
Graduate Student Support review (see attached). We also reviewed and revised a draft job description for department assessment
coordinators. Finally, we began a review of a list of CAA recommendations made since 2007 in order to determine which
recommendations require follow up.
CAA response to Provost Phillips re Final GSS Report (2/22/10):
Thank you for sharing the final report of the Graduate Student Support Review Panel with this Council. We appreciate the thoughtful
work of the panel, and the opportunity to comment. What we valued:
The attention to rigor was impressive, including the processes of norming and of checking inter-rater reliability and the use of
appropriate statistical analyses.
We agree with the observation noted on page 14 regarding the potentially prescriptive nature of the criteria used to evaluate
programs, and the importance of being clear about the standards by which departments are evaluated.
We appreciate the fact that departments could provide their own barometers of success.
Some of us saw value in this process and encourage regular such reviews. See caveats, below.
Our concerns and suggestions:
As you know, the effort involved in producing the departmental reports is considerable. If it is conducted again in the future, please
consider the following recommendations:
Regularly engage departments in the review, not only when there is a budget crisis.
Include a more explicit discussion of the purposes of the review beyond making funding decisions about graduate student
support.
Provide some evidence of validity of the rubric. It has plenty of face validity (it looks like it will measure what it is supposed
to measure) but its credibility would be enhanced by a discussion of the evidence of construct validity (it measures what it is
intended to measure) and content validity (it measures all of the important aspects of what it is intended to measure).
Ensure that departments make references to possible improvements and plans for making them.
Our final concern is that the GSS review is somewhat redundant with our regular program review process. We hope any future GSS
reviews can avoid such redundancy. At the same time, we intend to examine the GSS metrics with an eye for content and measures
with potential usefulness for program review, such as student retention and time-to-degree data.
CAFFECoR (Committee on Academic Freedom, Freedom of Expression, and Community Responsibility)
– Susanna Fessler, Chair
CAFFECoR has submitted a draft bill to the SEC about the “Principles of a Just Community” statement.
4
CERS (Committee on Ethics in Research and Scholarship) – John Monfasani, Chair
Here are the promised CERS documents. There are four: (1) the present policy text with lines numbered, (2) the new proposed CERS
text with lines numbered, (3) my comparison of the two, and (4) the beginning of the proposal as a bill written, unbidden (bless her),
by Carolyn MacDonald, who at the moment is too occupied with her duties as Physics chair to do more with it this weekend. Carolyn
has noted to me that some of what I say in the comparison would be impolitic if presented to the Senate. I take this criticism to heart,
but I see no reason not to be frank within the Executive Committee. Furthermore, discussion within the Committee will doubtlessly
play a large role in shaping the final form of the bill.
COR (Council on Research) – James Castracane, Chair
COR has nothing to report.
CPCA (Council on Promotions and Continuing Appointments) – Carlos
Rodriguez, Chair
CPCA has nothing to report.
GAC (Graduate Academic Council) – Laurence Kranich, Chair
GAC has nothing to report.
GOV (Governance Council) – Eric Lifshin, Chair
The Governance Council met on Friday, February 5th and discussed spring elections. A call letter will be sent to all voting faculty
asking for nominations for the positions of Senate Vice-Chair and Senate Secretary. GOV members began putting together a slate of
nominees for Senator-at-Large positions and those people will be contacted to identify their willingness to serve. In addition, GOV
members identified possible candidates for SUNY Senators to fill Senator Lanford’s vacancy and for a third SUNY Senator. Call
letters will be sent as soon as the volunteer web application is up and running. IT has been contacted to assist with coordination of this
effort. Senate Secretary Collier will be contacting the schools and colleges to inform them of pending vacancies in their various
departments. GOV’s meeting of Thursday, March 18, was cancelled.
LISC (Council on Libraries, Information Systems, and Computing) – Gwen
Moore, Chair
LISC has nothing to report.
UAC (Undergraduate Academic Council) – Joan Savitt, Chair
UAC has passed a bill describing an additional path to a UA degree that would not require the completion of a minor. The full bill and
its supporting rationale, including results of UAC’s research, will be distributed shortly. Not yet ready, but probably coming this year:
the Globalization Studies revised major; the revised retention standards for the Honors College; a small change in the S/U policy to
keep students who get U grades from enrolling in additional S/U graded courses above the number allowed. Remotely possible that we
will have these for the upcoming meeting.
The main point from UAC right now is that we are requesting wide distribution of the new degree plan to all Senators, for
DISCUSSION at the upcoming Senate, for VOTE at the May meeting.
ULC (University Life Council) – Daniel R. Smith, Chair
ULC met on March 15th and addressed two items of business during its meeting:
A report by John Murphy, Associate Vice President of Student Success on the Cleary Act, the federal statute that covers reporting of
crime statistics for all colleges and universities in the United States. Mr. Murphy indicated that the University, through his office, is in
the process of preparing for a scheduled State Comptrollers Audit that will evaluate UAlbany’s adherence and compliance with
Cleary. The audit is to be conducted in later March/April.
ULC also discussed a faculty member’s complaint about parking violation policy, referred directly by the Senate Chair Range and
copied to Steve Beditz, Interim Vice President of Finance and Business. ULC has some follow-up to complete but will be issuing a
written report on the matter.
UPPC (University Planning and Policy Council) – John Delano, Chair
The UPPC met on Friday, March 12, at 3:30-5:45 PM to consider three items.
(a) During the first week of March, GAC Chair Kranich sent a proposal, which had been approved by the GAC, to the UPPC Chair,
recommending that it be considered by the UPPC. Prior to this notification, the UPPC had not been aware of this proposal, which
recommended that admission to the M.A. program in Russian and its Certificate of Advanced Study be suspended. Dean Edelgard
Wulfert, who was invited to attend the UPPC meeting, provided additional information on the history of enrollments and rationale for
this proposal. Following this discussion, the UPPC voted unanimously in support of the proposal being referred to the Senate
Executive Committee at its next meeting. The UPPC is co-sponsoring a Bill with the GAC.
(b) Six questions from Senate Chair Range dating from January 2010 were placed on the agenda. Associate Vice President for Finance
and Business, Kim Bessette, attended the meeting at the invitation of the UPPC Chair, and provided information bearing on many of
the budget issues. One of the questions was concerned with the history of academic budgeting for graduate programs, especially in the
context of the final report from the Graduate Student Survey (GSS) Review Panel issued in December 2009. Two UPPC members,
David Wagner and Kajal Lahiri, were members of this review panel and provided insights into the procedures used in assessing nearly
5
60 graduate programs. Another of the questions raised by Senate Chair Range dealt with NYS funding of the CNSE. In preparation for
discussion of that matter at the UPPC meeting, Senate Chair Range sent copies of e-mails between himself and Senior VP Kaloyeros
(copied to others) to all UPPC members. The UPPC Chair invited representatives from CNSE to attend the UPPC meeting to
participate in this discussion. In addition to UPPC member, Eric Eisenbraun, the following CNSE representatives attended: Senate
Secretary Dick Collier, Senate Vice Chair Eric Lifshin, Senator Ed Cupoli, and CNSE Faculty Council Chair Tim Groves, who read
the statement copied below on behalf of the CNSE Faculty Council.
(c) The Chief-of-Staff, Vince Delio, was invited to provide an overview of Governor Patterson’s proposed ‘Empowerment and
Innovation Act’. The PowerPoint presentation and the ensuing discussion identified the strengths (e.g., predictable tuition increases
tied to HEPI, higher education price index; incentives for entrepreneurial initiatives; additional revenue from tuition that would go
directly to the campuses) and potential weaknesses (e.g., no guarantee that increased tuition would result in commensurate cuts in
NYS funding to campuses, as in the past) of this proposal.
The next UPPC meeting is scheduled for Friday, March 26.
Statement read into the UPPC record by CNSE Faculty Council Chair Tim Groves, at the Friday, March 12, UPPC meeting:
The College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering’s (CNSE) fiscal autonomy was established in 2004 with the
SUNY Board of Trustees (BOT) resolution that created CNSE, and the subsequent 2004 Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) between the CNSE Vice President and UAlbany President.
In its 2004 resolution, the Board of Trustees of the State University of New York confirmed the appointment of
Professor Alain E. Kaloyeros as Vice-President of the College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering and authorized
him to “…work with the President and the nanoscience and nanoengineering faculty of the University at Albany and
take all necessary and appropriate actions to implement the establishment and operation of said college…”
The subsequent 2004 MOU that included the CNSE fiscal autonomy was developed between the President and the
Vice President in accordance with this authority. The MOU clearly states that the CNSE budget is not subject to
oversight by the University Senate and its various councils and committees.
The CNSE fiscal autonomy, including the existence of the MOU, was fully and satisfactorily described to University
Resources Priorities and Advisory Committee (URPAC) at its April 8, 2005 meeting. URPAC was furnished with a
written copy of the supporting document presented at that meeting.
The matter was further clarified in a December 2008 BOT resolution.
Any questions regarding CNSE fiscal and budget matters by any external governance body should be referred to the
CNSE Faculty Council, the duly appointed governance body of CNSE.
NEW BUSINESS
Principles for a Just Community:
Chair Range requested approval to change the agenda and begin with the PJC topic. There were no objections
in doing so. The discussion was led by Malcolm Sherman, a member of CAFFECoR. He stated that the
sentiments of a just community is not a basis for disciplinary action and CAFFECoR members found it
confusing to have it as part of the Communities Rights and Responsibilities document. Removing PJC from all
UAlbany documents goes beyond the responsibilities of CAFFECoR. The document will still appear in
academic information and in the undergraduate bulletin. CAFFECoR would like to introduce a bill at the next
Senate meeting that would remove Principles for a Just Community from the Communities Rights and
Responsibilities document. A motion for moving this to the Senate was made and seconded, and the motion
was approved.
Revisions to Misconduct Policy:
CERS Chair John Monfasani discussed the changes in the revised policy stating there were no radical
differences and feels the new version is sounder. Chair Monfasani met with University Legal Counsel, John
Reilly in January and Mr. Reilly agreed with much of the work done by the ad hoc committee. Chair Monfasani
has forwarded the final version to Mr. Reilly. In discussions they have had so far, there are no major
differences from what was discussed in January. Chair Monfasani hoped today’s discussion would inform
CERS and Legal Counsel about any concerns that might exist.
6
Chair Range informed SEC members that President Philip has urged Legal Counsel to move quickly on this.
The earliest the policy would come to a vote by the full Senate would be in May and he inquired about whether
that timeframe should be maintained or should the Senate act only after approval comes from Legal Counsel. If
we move ahead and put it on the Senate floor in April, this would alert Legal Counsel to finalize its review, and
fully inform the Senate well before a vote in May. UPPC Chair Delano stated the context of this favors it going
forward. President Philip has indicated he would not be inclined to approve a bill unless it was reviewed by
Legal Counsel. Should Legal Counsel have any reservations, it would be desirable for Mr. Reilly or a member
of his staff to be at the next Senate meeting. Chair Range noted that we are very close to finalizing the policy
and the timeline should allow us to resolve any issues. GOV Chair Lifshin urged further interaction with
President Philip to continue to respectfully encourage Legal Counsel to provide feedback with a fast turnaround.
It’s important to convey that we don’t want this to end up on the back burner. Chair Range asked Provost
Phillips to convey the importance of today’s conversation to President Philip. He then asked for a motion to
move the bill to the Senate floor for discussion only. A motion was made and seconded, and approved with the
understanding that if Legal Counsel makes recommendations there could be changes to the policy.
GAC Bill re: Suspension of Graduate Programs in Russian (GAC):
CAS Dean Edelgard Wulfert was in attendance to discuss the proposal. She noted that the drop in enrollments
and national trends were the most influential factors in suspending the program. The discontinuation of
assistantship support was not as influential as the other two factors. UPPC Chair Delano informed SEC that the
UPPC voted unanimously to approve this. Dean Wulfert has followed enrollments for language programs over
a seven to eight year period. Interest in languages fluctuates and many have suffered a decline as has happened
with UAlbany’s Russian program. At the undergraduate level, enrollments are doing well but we cannot make
the CAS enrollment limits at the graduate level. Dean Wulfert explained that at this point the request is to
deactivate the program being requested but not to have it deregistered. CAS is working with the Russian
faculty to increase enrollments. Chair Range asked for questions from SEC members. There being none, he
asked for a motion to move the bill to the Senate floor. A motion was made, seconded and approved for
bringing to the Senate.
Interim Recommendation of Gen Ed Task Force:
Distinguished Teaching Professor and Chair of the Gen Ed Task Force, Stephen North, provided a summary of
the task force’s work and recommendation. He stated the task force is representative of campus units dealing
with undergraduates. He cited the conversation that Provost Phillips had with SUNY Interim Provost David
Lavallee in which Provost Lavallee indicated that campuses do not need to change their policies but
recommended a reaffirmation of our current principles. The task force has met twice and concluded that it
would be precipitous to change our general education requirements in a hurried manner. Thus, the task force is
recommending that UAlbany not change its current requirements for fall 2010.
The ensuing discussion brought forth concerns that SEC members had with the recommendation. ULC Chair
Smith expressed concern about losing students because other campuses are moving ahead on the issue. Those
concerns were echoed by SUNY Senator Lanford who stated that part of Provost Lavallee’s recommendation
was to make transferring easier for students, and Senator Lanford believes that UAlbany could be at a
disadvantage if we are not as competitive. Senate Secretary Collier was troubled that we may be making
UAlbany less attractive but agreed that we should reaffirm our policies as recommended to Provost Phillips.
Chair North indicated that the task force will continue its work to meet its next deadline in May for the second
part of its charge. The task force will consider where things go from this point. There are other influences
underway such as the forthcoming strategic plan recommendations concerning undergraduate education, and
changes that are occurring both locally and statewide. He stated the possibility of dropping the regents exams
in language and history; this would have significant impact on our general education requirements. Chair
Range reminded SEC members that the second part is more open ended, and the Senate will be providing more
7
direction and guidance to the task force in May. Right now the task force was charged with dealing with a short
term recommendations and they seem to have addressed this.
There continued to be concerns about not taking any action and to clearly convey this to the Senate. Chair
North was asked about what we could expect in terms of loss of transfer students. He stated that the University
accepts about 1,100 transfers each year but our gen ed requirements are not universally liked and it is possible
that we could be at a competitive disadvantage. SEC members continued to urge affirming our local
requirements and clearly conveying the actions of the task force to the Senate. Chair Range asked Chair North
to formulate a text of the recommendations in the form of a bill to present to the Senate. Chair North stated that
would need to come from UAC. Chair Range asked UAC Chair Savitt to work on this and circulate a draft
prior to the next Senate meeting. Chair Savitt agreed to discuss this with UAC.
Requirement of Minors for Degree Completion (UAC):
UAC Chair Savitt presented the bill and UAC would like to get the bill distributed well in advance of the April
Senate meeting but there would not be a vote until May. The bill does not eliminate minors but allows a student
to elect a path to complete 24 credits at the 300 level or above. The bill is friendly towards transfer students in
that courses at other institutions at the 300 level could be counted in the 24 credits. UAC has discovered that
UAlbany is the only University Center in the SUNY system that requires minors. Chair Savitt stated that UAC
sees the proposed bill as a continuation of general education at a higher level. It would allow students to
explore another area without claiming a minor. It would also allow students to have some control over how
they receive their college degree. Not all minors at UA require credits at the 300 level, and there is great
disparity among the rules for minors at UA. UAC is proposing that there be some level of rigor in the 24 credits
that would be required in the place of a minor by requiring that a UA degree that did not include a minor
include at least 24 credits at the 300 level or above, an amount which exceeds the requirement in some majors
and in many current combinations of majors + minors. When asked where these courses would come from, she
said they could be additional courses in the major or from other departments. She said the number of credits
taken at the 300 level would be consistent with what is required for some combined major/minor degree plans at
UA.
Some SEC members felt it would be a good idea, especially if half of the credits were outside the major at the
advanced level. UPPC Chair Delano stated that the implication seemed to be that 300 level courses would
require prerequisites. He asked if that would be a requirement and if courses would be reviewed for rigor. He
stated that identifying 300 level courses as rigorous and challenging is not always the case. Chair Savitt said the
courses will be more specialized but the 300 level is the defining characteristic.
Chair Range asked to move the discussion to the Senate. Senate Secretary Collier said it would be beneficial to
have the entire UAC attend the Senate meeting. He added that he did not believe the research done was
adequate and questioned where the supply of 300 level courses would come from. ULC Chair Smith objected
that smaller departments such as art, journalism and theater had not been part of the research and said that
students use these courses to go forward in their careers. The policy would deflate the minor and limit career
choices. Chair Range agreed that these would be good arguments to raise on the Senate floor.
OLD BUSINESS
Senate Resolution on Evaluation of Administrators:
Chair Range referred to the discussion that took place at the Senate meeting and based on that discussion, asked
SEC members if the wording of the resolution should be revised. ULC Chair Smith stated there was a clear
message at the Senate meeting supporting both evaluations of administrators and services and functions. GOV
Chair Lifshin stated that if we evaluate services and functions, problems with a specific administrator would be
8
realized through that process. UPPC Chair Delano supported that view. SUNY Senator Lanford stated that
evaluation of administrators is what used to be done but was disturbed by President Philip’s statement that he
would not support this. Senate Secretary Collier referred to the Middle States report submitted by Reed Hoyt.
The fourth bullet of the summary statements from the assessment team stressed assessment of offices and
services. All assessments are not always confidential so the constituency would be aware if there are problems
in any given area. Senator Lanford suggested changing the language from administrators to administrative
services and functions in order to address the President’s concerns. Chair Range asked for a motion to that
effect. The motion was made, seconded, and approved. The resolution will be presented at the next Senate
meeting with the new language for further discussion and vote.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5:20
Respectfully submitted by
Gail Cameron, Recorder
9
