Minutes (Revised), 2010 June 10

2009-2010 University Senate
Monday, May 10, 2010
3:30 pm, Campus Center Assembly Hall
Michael Range, Chair
Present:
J. Philippe Abraham, Heidi Andrade, Hassaram Bakhru, Robert Bangert-Drowns, Brea Barthel, 
Jeffrey Berman, Tom Bessette, R. Scott Birge, Daryl Bullis, Brian Butcher, Andrew Byon, James
Castracane, Richard Collier, Edward Cupoli, John Delano, James Dias, Sue Faerman, Nicholas 
Fahrenkopf, Susanna Fessler, Elizabeth Gaffney, Robert Gibson, Eric Hardiman, Allen Israel, 
Richard Johnson, Donald Keenan, John Kimball, Ryan King, Laurence Kranich, Winifred 
Kutchukian, Kajal Lahiri, Heather Larkin, Fernando Leiva, Christian Lenart, Eric Lifshin, 
Candace Merbler, John Monfasani, Gwendolyn Moore, Dale Morse, Robert Nakamura, Nancy 
Newman, John Pipkin, Michael Range, Joan Savitt, John Schmidt, Shadi Shahedipour-Sandvik, 
Benjamin Shaw, Daniel Smith, Kabel Nathan Stanwicks, Daniel White, Gary Yukl
Guests:
Kris Bendikas, Zakhar Berkovich, Ray Bromley, Jill Hanifan, Jackie Hayes, Bill Hedberg, 
Martin Hildebrand, Reed Hoyt, Bob Keesee, Deborah LaFond, Wayne Locust, Carolyn 
MacDonald, JoAnne Malatesta, John Murphy, Hany Shawky, Donald Siegel, Christine Wagner, 
Edelgard Wulfert
The meeting convened at 3:33 pm.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes were approved with minor corrections.
PRESIDENT’S REPORT BY GEORGE PHILIP
President Philip began his report with an update on budget matters.  He discussed what is known thus far 
concerning the bill that would furlough affected state workers.  There would be 20% work reduction or one out 
of five days when an employee would not work and would not receive pay.  The bill will impact about 70% of 
the state workforce.  Governor Patterson has projected it will save $30 million per week and reduce the $9 
billion deficit by approximately $240 million.  Groups that would be exempted include health and safety, 
federally funded positions, M/C and faculty with academic year obligations. If the governor is able to negotiate 
concessions from the labor unions, he would eliminate the furlough plan.  The President will keep the campus 
community informed of any updates on the matter.  The President also discussed the legislation introduced for 
an early retirement incentive.  If certain titles are targeted SUNY will inform our plan.  The plan for UAlbany 
would be subject to approval by the Board of Trustees.
The President informed the Senate that the Budget Advisory Group will be providing advice to him on financial 
planning.  The group is being co-chaired by Provost Phillips and Vice President for Finance and Business, Steve
Beditz.  The group will not be developing a campus budget but will inform all of the President’s decisions and 
actions related to the budget.  UAlbany is anticipating an additional $10.6 million cut.  The President said we 
will have to right size the organization and address how to redeploy scarce assets in the future.
1
The Governor will hold a press conference tomorrow to solicit support for PHEEIA.  The legislation has 
support from Lieutenant Governor Ravitch as well as from business councils and trade unions.  Chancellor 
Zimpher and many others will attend to show their support.
Enrollment management is on target to enroll 2,250 in the incoming freshman class.  The class will be smaller 
than in the past but reductions were necessary due to the lack of resources.  The number of transfer students has 
also seen a reduction in numbers.  The class shows excellent promise and is as strong as last year.
Campus Events:

The School of Business made its announcement today of the architectural plans for the new building.  
The event was well attended with community representatives and a show of local political support.

School of Social Welfare Dean Katherine Briar Lawson recently hosted a luncheon to celebrate the 
efforts of approximately 500 senior volunteers.

Lieutenant Richard Ravitch delivered the address at the Burton Lecture and honored outstanding 
community service leaders.

President Philip acknowledged the efforts of everyone who contributed to Clean-Up Day and Fountain 
Day.

The University will hold Commencement exercises this weekend.
In closing, President Philip recognized Senate Chair Range for the diligent work he’s done this past year.  The 
President said he has been a strong advocate on behalf of the faculty and thanked him for his contributions.
SENATE CHAIR’S REPORT BY MICHAEL RANGE
Faculty Athletics Representative Report. At the April 26, 2010 meeting, the SEC was joined by Teresa Harrison, Chair of the 
Intercollegiate Athletics Advisory Board, and by Lee McElroy, VP for Athletics Administration, to discuss data concerning UAlbany’s student
athletes. In summary, the distribution of academic interests and achievements of UAlbany athletes matches quite well that of the overall 
student population. The report has been posted on the Senate web site, and you are encouraged to review it.
Resolution on Evaluation of Administrators and Administrative Services and Functions. The SEC discussed first steps in the 
implementation of the resolution passed by the Senate on April 12, 2010. Janet Marler, Associate Professor in the Department of 
Management, joined the discussion and provided useful perspectives. There was consensus that the purpose of the evaluation would be to 
provide feedback to the administration that will assist in the identification of areas in need of improvement, and in the management of the 
university. The SEC charged GOV to develop an initial proposal for an ad hoc committee to be presented to the SEC by the middle of May.
Budget Advisory Group (BAG 3). The Senate is represented on this group by the full UPPC membership, by the Senate Chair, and by 
several other Senators who have served on the first two BAGs. The group had its first meeting on May 6, 2010, and is scheduled to meet 
biweekly through the middle of June.
Chair Range recognized the service of Parliamentarian Robert Gibson who will retire at the end of this year.  Chair 
Range thanked him for his great service to the Senate over many years and said he would be greatly missed.  He put out a 
call for a parliamentarian and said all recommendations should be directed to Vice-Chair Eric Lifshin.
Chair Range also recognized the services of Senate Secretary Richard Collier whose term will end this year.  Chair Range
thanked Secretary Collier for the excellent work and contributions the Senate over the years.
OTHER REPORTS
PROVOST’S REPORT--SUSAN PHILLIPS
Provost Phillips referred to the copies of the working draft available of the Strategic Plan at the sign in table.  
She provided special thanks to the co-chairs for each of the strategic goals:
2

Undergraduate Education--Jim Acker, John Pipkin

The Undergraduate Experience--Christine Bouchard, John Delano

Graduate Education--Ginny Goatly, David Wagner

Research--James Dias, Carolyn MacDonald

Infrastructure and Environment--Steve Beditz, Marybeth Salmon

Alumni and Community Connections--Kevin Bean, Jen Carron
Each of the goals or themes that have been identified has six objectives and these can be viewed on the wiki.  
The Provost welcomes comments and input.  She will present these to the President and they will be reviewed 
by the vice presidents and Chancellor Zimpher over the summer.
Provost Phillips thanked those who served as mentors to participants in the undergraduate research conference.  
The event highlighted the research of an excellent group of students.  She also thanked faculty who have been 
involved in the CLUE Quality of Life group to look at ways to retain faculty and staff and to develop their 
careers.  She has been assisted by Tine Reimers.
The Provost and President Philip are continuing their communication plan and will hold another conversation 
later in May.  They hope to resume the program in the fall.
Notes from Campus:

Provost Phillips applauded Graduate Studies in creating the final pieces to the Certificate in Professional
Science Management.

Two CAS faculty members are recipients of Fulbright Awards:  Professor Lawrence Schell from 
Anthropology received a four month grant to conduct research in Florence, Italy.  Distinguished 
Teaching Professor Stephen North from the English Department received an award for study in the 
Ukraine during the Spring 2011 semester.

A team collaboration by the School of Business and CNSE won the First Regional Plan Competition.

CCI Professor Siwei Lyu received an NSF award to develop tools that will detect digital images that 
have been altered.

In the School of Criminal Justice, Associate Professor Frankie Bailey has received the George N. Dove 
award for contributions to the study of crime fiction.

Professor Myrna Friedlander from the School of Education received the 2010 Distinguished 
Contribution to Family Systems Research Award.

Renowned Cancer expert John McLachlan spoke at the 2nd Annual Hogarty Family Foundation Lecture 
at the School of Public Health last month.

The Rockefeller College’s Center for International Development was awarded a contract for $9 million 
to work on legislative strengthening in Bangla Desh.

Student athletes have contributed over 2,400 hours volunteering for community service this year.

The University participated in a conference that will assist students with disabilities in preparing for 
college.

Chancellor Nancy Zimpher cited 11 UAlbany students as recipients of the Chancellor’s Award for 
Student Excellence.

Fountain Day was a great success with over 9,000 students participating.

The Midtown Neighborhood Watch Program was recently honored by Tom Gebhardt who heads the 
program.

The Tenth Annual Research Colloquium was recently held in the Life Sciences Research Building.

Text book rental will be available this fall as part of the new contract with Barnes and Noble.

Several alumni were recently honored at the 2010 Excellence Awards.
3
SUNY-WIDE SENATE REPORT – WILLIAM LANFORD AND DANIEL WHITE
SUNY PROVOST’S DRAFT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF SUNY TRUSTEES’ REVISION OF 
GENERAL EDUCATION:
DISCUSSION DRAFT 4/19/2010
Date:
XXX, 2010
Vol. 10 No. 1
From:
Office of the Provost and Senior Vice Chancellor for
Academic Affairs
Subject:
Policy and Guidance:  State University General 
Education Requirement
To:
Presidents, State-Operated Campuses
Presidents, Community Colleges
Statutory College Contacts
This memorandum informs you of updated policy and guidance on 
general education based on the following three resolutions recently 
adopted by the State University’s Board of Trustees:  

Trustees Resolution 2009-138, Reaffirmation and 
Strengthening of the State University Board of Trustee Policy 
on Student Mobility (Transfer and Articulation), of November
17, 2009; 

Trustees Resolution 2010-006, Amendments to General 
Education Requirement, of January 19, 2010; and

Trustees Resolution 2010-039, Streamlining the State 
University Board of Trustees Policy on Assessment, of March 
23, 2010.
It supersedes and replaces previous policy and guidance issued in 2003. 
The attached document reflects current Board policies and their 
implementation.  The document was developed in consultation with 
faculty governance leaders, the Undergraduate Committee of the 
University Faculty Senate, the Academic Affairs Committee of the 
Faculty Council of Community Colleges and the SUNY Registrars 
Association, as well as with Presidents and Chief Academic Officers in 
all sectors of the University.  
Questions regarding this memorandum may be directed to Assistant 
Provost Nancy Willie-Schiff at Nancy.Willie-Schiff@suny.edu.  
Attachment
Copy:
Chief Academic Officers, All Campuses
President, University Faculty Senate
President, Faculty Council of Community Colleges
President, SUNY Registrars Association
State University of New York
Policy and Guidance: State University General Education
Requirement
I.
Relevant Board Policies
Relevant Board policies are contained in:

Trustees Resolution 2010-006, Amendments to General 
Education Requirement; 

Trustees Resolution 2009-138, Reaffirmation and 
Strengthening of the State University Board of Trustee Policy 
on Student Mobility (Transfer and Articulation);  and

Trustees Resolution 2010-039, Streamlining the State 
University Board of Trustees Policy on Assessment.
  
A.
Trustees Resolution 2010-006, adopted on January 19, 2010, 
subsumes and revises all previous Board policies on the State 
University of New York General Education Requirement 
(SUNY-GER) and takes effect beginning in fall 2010.  
Salient Provisions
i.
Thirty credits of general education or the 
equivalent are required for a State University of New 
York (SUNY) baccalaureate degree.  
ii.
Faculty shall establish the specific course 
requirements and content of one or more general 
education curricula reflective of the best practices in 
American higher education.  Such curricula shall 
include broad, high-quality courses that provide 
students with a set of non-specialized, coherent and 
focused educational experiences aimed at enabling 
students to acquire knowledge, skills and 
competencies that are useful and important for all 
educated persons regardless of their jobs or 
professions.  
iii.
Each general education curriculum shall be 
academically rigorous and comprehensive and shall 
complement and build on students’ academic 
preparation.
iv.
Graduates with a baccalaureate degree shall 
demonstrate knowledge and skills in at least seven of 
ten1 SUNY-GER knowledge and skills areas:  
a.
Basic Communication (required);
b.
Mathematics (required); and
c.
at least five of the following eight 
areas: Natural Science, Social Science, American
History, Western Civilization, Other World 
Civilizations, Humanities, the Arts and Foreign 
Languages. 
v.
Graduates with a baccalaureate degree shall 
also demonstrate competency in two additional areas: 
a.
Critical Thinking; and
b.
Information Management. 
vi.
Consistent with the July 22, 2003, Memorandum to 
Presidents (Vol. 03, No. 5), the ten knowledge and 
skills areas as well as the two competency areas are 
defined in terms of the student learning outcomes 
contained in the Guidelines for the Approval of State 
University General Education Requirement Courses, 
available at 
http://www.suny.edu/provost/generaleducation/course-
guidelines-v2.pdf
vii.
Campuses offering programs leading to Associate in 
Arts (AA) or Associate in Science (AS) degrees shall 
design their general education requirements for these 
programs to facilitate transfer. 
viii. 
The Provost shall oversee implementation, including a
process for approving appropriate exceptions for 
“Specialized Colleges, Colleges of Technology, 
programs awarding two-year vocational degrees, and 
for other special circumstances.”
B.
Trustees Resolution 
2009-138, adopted on November 17, 2009, subsumes and 
extends all previous Board policies on student mobility and 
transfer, and takes effect in fall 2010. 
1 Previous policy required students to demonstrate knowledge and skills 
in ten of ten SUNY-GER areas.  See Memorandum to Presidents (Vol. 3,
No. 5).
4
Salient Provisions for Student Mobility Related to the SUNY 
General Education 
Requirement
i.
Students transferring within the State University of 
New York shall be treated by their receiving campus 
in the same way as native students for all academic 
purposes. [N.B.  This provision is a general statement 
of policy that should be implemented as indicated in 
Section II, Implementation Policies and Procedures.]
ii.
Students transferring within the University shall 
receive full credit towards the SUNY-GER for 
successfully completed SUNY-GER courses and 
SUNY-GER waivers or equivalencies granted at other 
University campuses.  This applies to students 
transferring with or without a SUNY AA or AS 
degree.    
C.
Trustees Resolution 2010-039, adopted on March 23, 2010, 
replaces all previous Board policies on assessment, and takes 
effect in fall 2010.
i.
A campus shall promote academic excellence by 
developing and implementing plans for the regular 
assessment and review of general education, such that 
the campus meets or exceeds the assessment standards
set by State regulations and the Middle States 
Commission on Higher Education and, as appropriate,
programmatic accreditation bodies. 
ii.
A campus’s regular review of general education 
shall include the assessment of student learning in 
terms of the student learning outcomes of the SUNY-
GER.  
II.
Implementation Policies and Procedures
A.
General education curriculum
 
 .  A campus shall have 
one or more general education curricula consistent with 
University policy.  Each such curriculum shall enable 
graduates of baccalaureate degree programs to meet the 
SUNY-GER student learning outcomes for Basic 
Communication, Mathematics, at least five of the other eight 
SUNY-GER knowledge and skills areas, and the two SUNY-
GER competency areas.  A campus may also have local 
general education requirements.  
i.  
SUNY-GER courses.  A campus shall have a faculty 
review process for adding, deleting or revising SUNY-
GER courses and updating the System-level list of such 
courses.  Each such course shall be aligned with the 
SUNY-GER student learning outcomes for its SUNY-
GER area.   [N.B. Previously approved SUNY-GER 
course assigned fewer than three credits should be re-
submitted to the University Provost using the standard 
course proposal form referenced in Section III.]
ii.
Syllabi for SUNY-GER courses
 
 .  In keeping with good 
practice and the expectations of the Middle States 
Commission on Higher Education, campuses are 
encouraged to include applicable SUNY-GER student 
learning outcomes on SUNY-GER course syllabi.
iii. Advanced or upper-division courses
 
 .  A campus may 
include advanced or upper-division courses in a general 
education curriculum.  In addition, if an advanced or 
upper-division course has a prerequisite that is a SUNY-
GER course, students may use the advanced course to 
meet the SUNY-GER, regardless of whether that course 
has been identified as a SUNY-GER course.  
iv.
Student Waivers or Equivalencies
 
 .  Where appropriate, in
accordance with local academic policies, a campus shall 
afford students an opportunity to obtain a waiver or 
equivalency for a SUNY-GER area by demonstrating 
college-level proficiency in the student learning 
outcomes for that area.  When such a proficiency 
equivalent is approved for a student and credit is not 
actually awarded, the 30 credit overall requirement is 
reduced by three credits. Waivers may also be granted as 
a reasonable accommodation for a learning or other 
disability.
v.
Program Waivers
 
 .  A campus may seek a waiver of a 
SUNY-GER knowledge and skills area for a specific 
academic program when the program’s curriculum is 
governed by external standards, such as, but not limited 
to, specialized accreditation, and the entire SUNY-GER 
would delay students’ degree completion.   However, the 
required areas of Basic Communication and 
Mathematics may not be waived.  The flexibility in the 
updated SUNY-GER reduces, and may even eliminate, 
the need for waivers.  
vi. Information for students
 
 .  A campus shall provide 
information about its general education requirements 
using its catalog, website and other locations.  The 
information should be clear, accurate, complete, current 
and easy to find.  It shall inform prospective and enrolled
students about specific campus and programmatic 
general education requirements (e.g., specific general 
education requirements in teacher education programs).  
[N.B.  The updated SUNY-GER takes effect for first-
year students entering in fall 2010, but campuses may 
apply it to continuing and returning students as well, and 
may give these students the choice of using the original 
or updated SUNY-GER.]   
vii. Assessment of the general education curriculum
 
 .  A 
campus shall have a process that meets the standards of 
the Middle States Commission on Higher Education for 
assessing whether students achieve the SUNY-GER 
student learning outcomes in its general education 
curriculum, and for using assessment results to inform 
planning and resource allocation decisions, and to 
improve student learning.  
  
B.
AA and AS Programs
 
 .  Campuses with associate 
degree programs should include at least seven of ten SUNY-
GER knowledge and skills areas in AA and AS degree 
programs and, whenever practical, a total of 30 credits of 
SUNY-GER.  Basic Communication and Mathematics should 
be two of the seven areas. 
C.
AAS Programs
 
 .  While many Associate in Applied 
Science (AAS) programs incorporate seven SUNY-GER 
knowledge and skills areas, Board policy does not address 
AAS programs.  Wherever feasible, an AAS program should 
incorporate seven SUNY-GER knowledge and skills areas, 
including Basic Communication and Mathematics, especially 
if the program tends to transfer significant numbers of 
graduates to SUNY baccalaureate programs.
D.
Student Mobility and Transfer.  One of the goals of the SUNY-
GER is to support seamless student mobility and transfer 
within the University.
i.
Junior status for transfer students
 
 .  As stated in Board 
policy adopted in 1990, and reaffirmed in Trustees 
Resolution 2009-138, transfer students with AA or AS 
degrees from SUNY campuses, when accepted in 
5
parallel programs at baccalaureate campuses of the 
University, shall be accorded full junior status and be 
given the opportunity to complete the requirements for a 
baccalaureate degree within the same period of time as 
native students.  These transfer students shall not be 
required to duplicate SUNY-GER areas that they met at 
prior campuses.  
ii.
Transfer of the entire SUNY-GER
 
 .  If a transfer student 
has successfully met the entire SUNY-GER, a receiving 
campus is expected to accept this as having satisfied its 
SUNY-GER.  This does not preclude campuses from 
implementing local general education requirements, 
local grade requirements for degree credit, or from 
applying all relevant local and programmatic 
requirements to transfer students.  
iii.
Transfer of SUNY-GER courses and waivers
 
 .  Any 
SUNY-GER area that has been met – whether through a 
course, a waiver or equivalency, including instructional 
modalities such as infusion across the curriculum – shall 
be accepted for SUNY-GER transfer purposes at every 
SUNY campus.  This does not preclude campuses from 
implementing local general education requirements, 
local grade requirements for degree credit or from 
applying all relevant local and programmatic 
requirements to transfer students.  Satisfactory 
completion for granting of course credit is defined as a 
grade of C or better.  However, if a sending campus’s 
local policy is to accept a C- or D grade to complete a 
SUNY-GER requirement, the requirement is deemed to 
be completed even if the course and its grade are not 
accepted at a receiving campus. 
iv.
General Education Transcript Addendum
 
 .  A sending 
campus shall provide a General Education Transcript 
Addendum (GETA) for each transferring student, and the
receiving campus shall accept the sending campus’ 
GETA certification of completed SUNY-GER areas.  
v.
Baccalaureate programs:  facilitating transfer from AA 
 
 
and AS programs.  Baccalaureate campuses shall enable 
students with AA and AS degrees from SUNY campuses 
to obtain a baccalaureate degree in a period of time 
comparable to upper-division students who are not 
transfers.  These campuses may use multiple approaches,
including:  
a. 
incorporating SUNY-GER courses into the upper-
division requirements of transfers’ baccalaureate 
programs;
b. 
developing upper-division general education 
courses or modules; and
c.  
establishing regional arrangements with feeder 
campuses.
When a baccalaureate program has a local general 
education requirement that exceeds the SUNY-GER, or 
when a baccalaureate campus has distinctive lower-division 
courses in SUNY-GER areas that have become a hallmark 
of its undergraduate programs, the following principles 
apply. 

If a transfer student has completed 30-credits and the 
entire SUNY-GER elsewhere, a receiving campus 
should exempt the student from local or hallmark 
general education requirements that are not externally 
required (e.g., programs leading to teacher 
certification). 

If a transfer student has not completed 30 credits and 
the entire SUNY-GER, the receiving campus has the 
option of waiving one or more SUNY-GER categories 
to permit the student to complete local or hallmark 
courses, provided that these courses are significantly 
different from courses the student has already 
completed. 

Campuses and baccalaureate programs that have been 
exempting transfer students with an A.A. or A.S. degree 
who have met the entire SUNY-GER from local or 
hallmark requirements are encouraged to continue to do 
so.
vi. 
AA and AS programs: facilitating transfer to baccalaureate 
programs.  Transfer is one of the goals of AA and AS 
programs.  Therefore, it is important for these programs to 
enable their graduates to fulfill the SUNY-GER and ensure 
that their students receive appropriate information and 
advisement about the 30-credit SUNY-GER needed to 
complete a baccalaureate degree.  Special information and 
advisement may be needed for baccalaureate degree 
programs with their own general education requirements 
(e.g., teacher education programs).  
a.
To support student 
mobility, programs leading to AA and AS degrees are 
encouraged to include SUNY-GER courses that cover 
seven SUNY-GER knowledge and skills areas, 
including Basic Communication and Mathematics, as 
an integral part of their degree requirements.  
b.
To further support 
student mobility, campuses with AA and AS programs 
are encouraged to enable their graduates to fulfill the 
entire 30-credit SUNY-GER by using such approaches
as:  

incorporating the 30-
credit SUNY-GER into AA and AS degree 
programs’ requirements;

developing special 
advisement tracks for students planning to 
transfer within SUNY;

developing certificate 
programs in general education that would 
demonstrate certificate holders’ fulfillment of the
SUNY-GER; and

using the SUNY 
Learning Network (SLN), where SUNY-GER 
courses are identified in promotional materials 
and online at http://www.sln.suny.edu.
6
vii. AAS programs: facilitating transfer to baccalaureate 
 
 
programs.  Associate degree-granting campuses are 
encouraged to incorporate seven SUNY-GER knowledge 
and skills areas into their AAS programs, especially in 
programs that tend to transfer significant numbers of 
graduates to SUNY baccalaureate programs
III. Resources for Campuses
Trustees Resolution 2009-138, Reaffirmation and Strengthening of the 
State University Board of Trustee Policy on Student Mobility (Transfer 
and Articulation), November 17, 2009
http://www.suny.edu/provost/transfer/BOTpolicies.cfm
Trustees Resolution 2010-006, Amendments to General Education 
Requirement, January 19, 2010
http://www.suny.edu/provost/generaleducation/campusgenedresources.cf
m
Trustees Resolution 2010-039, Streamlining the State University Board 
of Trustees Policy on Assessment, March 23, 2010
http://www.suny.edu/provost/Assessmentinit.cfm?navLevel=5
State University of New York Guidelines for the Approval of State 
University General Education Requirement Courses  
http://www.suny.edu/provost/generaleducation/course-guidelines-v2.pdf
Forms for adding, deleting or revising SUNY-GER courses
http://www.suny.edu/provost/generaleducation/GenEdSubmissionForms.
cfm. 
Lists of approved SUNY-GER courses, by campus
http://www.suny.edu/provost/generaleducation/CourseList/mastercampu
slist.cfm
SUNY-GER program waiver request form
http://www.suny.edu/provost/generaleducation/GenEdSubmissionForms.
cfm.  
Memorandum to Presidents (Vol. 3 No.1), January 2, 2003
http://www.suny.edu/provost/MTP/mtp03-1.pdf
Memorandum to Presidents (Vol. 3 No. 5), July 22, 2003
http://www.suny.edu/provost/MTP/mtp03-5.pdf
Middle States Commission on Higher Education’s Characteristics of 
Excellence
http://www.msche.org/publications_view.asp?
idPublicationType=1&txtPublicationType=Standards+for+Accreditation
+and+Requirements+of+Affiliation
7
Report of SUNY Faculty Senate Undergraduate Committee (submitted by Dan 
Smith)
The Committee coordinated the first SUNY Scholarly Poster 
Program at the Legislative Office Building on April 13th. Eight 
students from UAlbany presented posters of their research work at
this session. Many legislators and their staffs stopped by to view 
the session. There were 200 students from 32 SUNY campuses 
present. Plans will be made next year to make this a biennial 
event.
General Education: The Committee responded with comments and
observations to the “Draft Guidance on General Education 
Memorandum to Presidents” (attached) distributed by Interim 
Provost Lavallee. The changes to the SUNY General Education 
Program for the campuses are underlined. Below I include 
comments submitted to the Undergraduate Committee by 
UAlbany Executive Committee members, and the UAC.
While several areas of the revised BOT Policy need clarification 
through the Memorandum, the UG Committee recommended the 
memorandum be finalized and distributed quickly so that all 
campuses could officially alter their General Education Programs 
to avoid problems in fall 2010. The BOT changes and the 
memorandum were hailed among committee members as ‘a long 
time in coming’, ‘what we have worked for ten years to achieve’, 
“an immediate boost in a time of severe fiscal constraint and a set
of changes that directly help the students and faculty”, and finally,
‘a return to campus-based, faculty-defined general education’. 
The UG Committee felt that SUNY and the BOT is responding to 
the needs of the faculty to develop and define what a good general
and liberal education means on each campus. The other benefit is 
an immediate down-sizing of the SUNY General Education 
Program effective Fall 2010, which may be made retroactive. The 
net effect is immediate and highly positive: it helps transfers and 
frosh, and in addition may help current students who have been 
burdened by an atavistic and externally imposed program that 
caused chaos on campuses for ten-plus years.
Finally, a UG Committee unanimously supports the memorandum 
and changes and encouraged SUNY and the University Faculty 
Senate to communicate the advantages of the changes to the 
campuses as well as seeking timely and minimally chaotic 
implementation.
Comments on the Draft Memorandum from 
UAlbany
Comment #1, Undergraduate Academic Council: “Can we have
some clarification of what the "entire GER" means? Esp p. 5-6. 
How are we referring to the local GER which is in conformity 
with trustees' policy vs. the additional courses that are really 
local?”
Comment #2: “Advanced or upper-division courses . A campus 
may include advanced or upper-division courses in a general 
education curriculum. In addition, if an advanced or upper-
division course has a prerequisite that is a SUNY-GER course, 
students may use the advanced course to meet the SUNY-GER, 
regardless of whether that course has been identified as a SUNY-
GER course. 
This is potentially huge. I support the idea, but wonder how it will
be implemented. Could DARS be programmed to pick up such 
things? Or would it require filling out a form? Naysayers of this 
clause will complain that the upper-level courses may not cover 
all the requirements of GenEd currently in place (for example, in 
“Regions Beyond Europe” the upper level courses may not have a
geographical component), which I suppose is a valid concern. The
worry is that those naysayers will then require instructors of the 
upper-level courses to modify their curriculum to address this 
problem.
In cruder terms, this clause is a loophole big enough for an ocean 
liner. However, because I feel that Gen Ed is already byzantine 
enough and puts a tremendous burden on our students, I’m 
friendly to the loophole. I just don’t think most people will be. I 
mean, if the Gen Ed powers that be won’t give students “Regions 
Beyond Europe” credit for studying abroad in East Asia for a year
because they worry that the four main GenEd components of “1. 
knowledge of the distinctive features (e.g. history, institutions, 
economies, societies, cultures) of one region beyond Europe or 
European North America 2) an understanding of the region from 
the perspective of its people(s) 3) an ability to analyze and 
contextualize cultural and historical materials relevant to the 
region and 4) an ability to locate and identify distinctive 
geographical features of the region” won’t be met, how will they 
react the possibility of suddenly adding hundreds of upper level 
courses to the Gen Ed list without close scrutiny?”
Comment #3, Dick Collier, Senate Secretary: “From the start of
SUNYGER, campuses resented the imposition of requirements by
the Trustees partly because it was another “unfunded mandate” 
but mostly because it interfered with each campus’ judgment on 
what should be the liberal education important for its own 
students based on campus traditions and resources and suited to 
the students’ needs and major pursuits. It was incredibly 
disruptive to established campus patterns and workloads, and it 
entailed significant additional campus-funded instructional cost. 
From the student’s perspective, it in many cases made it more 
difficult to transfer from a two-year to a baccalaureate program 
and graduate on time. The additional requirements, coupled with 
campus decisions to retain and define as “local” some of their 
previous requirements, made it more difficult to fit everything in 
to eight semesters. Given shortages in some categories, students 
on many courses had to spend additional time and money to meet 
SUNYGER requirements online or at their local community 
college over the summer or in a winter session.
The draft you have circulated dramatically addresses all  of those 
problems. I of course was particularly pleased that AAS students 
were mentioned along with AA and AS recipients, since that is a 
group I fought for successfully when I was Chair of the UFS 
Undergraduate Committee but SUNY was working with the BOT 
on giving only AA and AS students preferential consideration 
upon transferring (a SUNY governance “victory” that 
disappeared, along with our articulation agreements, with the 
advent of SUNYGER). For frosh admits and transfers, the 7 of 10
definition alone is a tremendous boon, but a special boon to 
community college students who should have been provided 7 of 
10 by the community college for the past ten years. If, as I 
understand the draft, the intent of it is to put this into effect in fall
2010 for all students, then many of our current students will now 
be able to graduate on time and do so without going to summer 
school (or without graduating later “in absentia” after paying for 
the missing coursework at whatever college is closest to their 
home or job.)
For departments and schools and the individual member of the 
teaching faculty, there should be rejoicing that requirements are 
less prescriptive and that precedence is given to allow a campus’ 
“local” or “hallmark” requirements to substitute for approximate 
equivalent SUNYGER categories (exactly reversing the 
circumstances which led to the abuse and wrath heaped upon 
members of the original PACGE committee forced to use Provost 
Salins’ guidelines—I say this as the PACGE member who fought 
SUNY tooth and nail on these points, since one of the campuses 
assigned to me was Stony Brook). 
8
Best of all, of course, is that this allows each campus to 
decompress immediately its total number of general education 
requirements (SUNY + local), clearing the stage for consideration
of additional campus-based requirements. You too are well aware 
of the number of times in the past decade an idea for adding a 
Gen Ed requirement or expanding an existing one was 
immediately rejected on the grounds “our students already have 
so many of these requirements that they can’t graduate on time,” 
and I doubt our campus was unique in that regard.
SUNYGER was imposed on all campuses with insufficient time 
to implement and with insufficient resources to meet the new 
demands and with the additional burden that each campus was 
required to have its implementation plan and  each course 
proposed for each Gen Ed category approved through PACGE and
then by the SUNY Provost. Yet campuses accomplished that, 
some better than others to be sure. An unfortunate byproduct was 
the creation of “Gen Ed czars” on campuses, some of whom have 
grown comfortable in their pay and power, just as some 
departments have grown comfortable as the supplier of courses 
which, for good or ill, are the principal supply for a given 
category on a campus and thus must be taken by students wishing 
to graduate.
I’m sure some administrators and even some faculty will howl 
that giving sudden, immediate redress to the students, faculty and 
campuses doesn’t allow enough “planning.” I submit that coping 
with the draft policy’s removal of requirements, easing of student 
burdens (and the students’ and their parents’ demands regarding 
closed courses or those insufficiently offered), and elimination of 
bean-counting bureaucratic busywork for administrators and staff 
assigned the functions of supplying data to ACGE and GEAR is a 
walk in the park compared to the tasks required when SUNYGER 
was implemented. And when the state and the campuses are in the
midst of a devastating financial crisis, when many more students 
and their parents also have serious financial woes (including 
unemployment or underemployment), and when student prospects
for after hours, evening and summer jobs are seriously reduced, 
the immediate implementation of the BOT revised policy in the 
manner described in the draft document should be considered a 
blessing. 
I realize there are administrators who like to count beans (or at 
least such prestige as they believe accrues from having bean 
counters in their employ). There are faculty who believe their 
disciplinary area should have been held by the Trustees as at least 
as sacrosanct as mathematics and basic communication. There are
younger faculty (perhaps even students) who may think that the 
SUNYGER categories were time-honored on their home campus, 
having been developed by thoughtful planning over a span of 
decades, not suddenly imposed on all of us completely against our
will and at short notice. But there are also faculty and students 
who realize the arbitrary and capricious selectivity of the original 
BOT resolution and its implementation and who might think a 
literature course is at least as worthy as a nebulous “social 
science” catch-all as a universally expected requirement, or a 
philosophy/religion course, or something reflecting technology as 
much as a natural science. I personally object to NINE credits 
minimum of U.S., Western Civ, and Other World Cultures, but 
would have more difficulty arguing against a “history” 
requirement—and as you well know, since SUNYGER was 
established not a single student at UAlbany was required to take a
course from the Department of History. 
In conclusion, I loudly applaud the draft and commend the new 
SUNY common sense and genuine concern for the welfare of 
transfers and other undergraduates. I urge the Undergraduate 
Committee to support the draft and hope the University Faculty 
Senate will do so as well. I consider this the most significant 
immediately positive plan to come from BOT and SUNY in a long
time and since it is of extreme financial and temporal importance 
to so many students, I hope complaints about changing degree 
clearance systems, requiring department and school rethinking of 
logistics, and the like will not postpone its implementation—
particularly since the same “whining” didn’t delay the imposition 
of SUNYGER. Thank you.”
Comment #4, Dan Smith, ULC Chair and SUNY Senate UG 
Committee Member: “This is a long time in coming, and I agree 
with the sweep of the reform, as well as the direction allowing 
campuses to decide on General Education as it defines their 
campus intellectual culture as well as how we educate our 
students—something important to each campus.
One issue which should be discussed is the consideration of using
one year of study abroad experience in place of either the Europe 
or Other World Cultures requirements, depending on location the 
student chose. We must remember and acknowledge that the study
of another culture’s most important work is done living in that 
culture, using its language as it is meant to be used, learning the 
culture, its ways, nuances, ceremonies, social activities, politics, 
etc. in situ. Since SUNY has probably the strongest set of 300+ 
study abroad programs to choose from in higher education, we 
would be remiss as a faculty if we did not encourage the use this 
resource even more now, and YES, within our General 
Education Programs; encourage foreign language study and 
culture study beyond the classroom experiences to truly educate 
our students as broadly as we can. This is one place SUNY could 
be a bona fide leader.
The prerequisites rule seems a bit sweeping, as we are unsure how
sweeping it is meant to be; some courses that have Gen Eds as a 
prerequisite can be somewhat narrow in focus. While I do not 
object, in principle, I thought it worth noting as one colleague 
wrote that in, and others have mentioned it. It also means the next
Gen Ed committee must be prepared for a deluge of upper level 
requests.
Bring it on and bring it on fast. I hope, like Rose, the campuses 
receive this before the end of May, hopefully before the end of 
spring semester.”
Transmission Memo from Ken O’Brien, SUNY Faculty Senate
Chair
I’ll begin by noting the long, very positive review of your draft 
implementation memo from Dick Collier, an old SUNY hand at U 
Albany who has been involved with SUNY GER from the 
beginning. 
My own reading is almost as positive, but there are a couple of 
points I would like to add, amplify or have you clarify.
1. It would be helpful to have all the GER programs for ALL 
campuses submitted to your office (II.A.vi.), for two reasons: to 
make certain they comply with the minimum and to get them up 
on the website. In doing so, it would probably be helpful to have a
reporting template that would let the requirements met be 
obvious, as well as the additional requirements. This might also 
encourage students at community colleges to think in terms of the
SUNY GER for their campus and for the transfer school. 
2. The implementation adds a new wrinkle (II.A.i.), one we 
promised would not be there, the resubmission of courses that are 
less than three credits. We indicated in the fall that courses that 
had been approved would be grandfathered in, and they should be.
Students still need 30 credits and at least seven areas, so no harm,
no foul.
3. I think the upper division “pre-req” (II. A. iii.) needs to be a bit
cleaner. 
4. I would put D. (the relationship between SUNY GER and 
Student Mobility) upfront, and then repeat it. The campuses really
need to see that the flexibility is not simply a result of SUNY 
9
getting wise, but that the policy is predicated on its relationship to
the other. My fear is that we will get so many different GE 
programs that student mobility will be made more, not less, 
difficult. 
5. I would urge you to consider breaking II.D. ii.) into two items, 
one on satisfying SUNY GER, a second on local flexibility. And 
the latter could even mention that ½ the campuses currently 
require only the SUNY GER for transfers, before local upper 
division additions common to all students, which means they have
a different set of Gen Ed requirements for each category of 
student, native and transfer.
6. I still don’t like the bullet on the bottom of p. 5, which we 
could call the Genesseo rule. Their Humanities requirement 
should be able to included, one way or another, no matter how 
many credits a student has completed in SUNY GER. Just my two
cents. More important perhaps is the fact that the rule (or at least 
the first bullet) might be read as demanding that receiving 
colleges accept the 30 credit Gen Ed package a student has 
completed elsewhere as meeting ALL their requirements. 
Operative phrase: “a receiving campus should exempt the student 
[who has completed 30-credits and the entire SUNY-GER 
elsewhere] from local ….general education requirements that are 
not externally required.” See the problem? Others have. 
10
Dan White submitted the following additions to the SUNY Senator’s Report:
University Centers Sector Concerns
1.
Recruiting new presidents is one of the most important areas for shared governance.  In difficult times, 
recruitments are both more difficult and more important.  We are concerned that the participation of faculty, 
relative to all other interested parties, does not get out of balance.  
To be specific, we hope:

That faculty participation on search committees does not get diluted to below 50%.

That all the finalists meet at a minimum with the campus governance Executive Committee, if not more 
widely. 
2.
We hear that SUNY is cutting at least 2700 sections without cutting enrollment.
Since there is currently no slack in SUNY, this will lead to an increase in a student's time-to-degree.

Such an increase in time-to-degree is financially equivalent to an increase in tuition.

Such an increase in time-to-degree delays when our students enter the work force and begin to pay NYS 
taxes.
In addition, cutting sections without cutting enrollment lowers campus profiles and reduces SUNY ability to 
meet its goals of training the next generation of workers and conducting research vital to the economic future 
of NYS.
3.
The University Center Section unanimously supports SUNY's position that all University Centers be treated
equally under the Empowerment Act.
4.
There is still confusion about the consequences of the BOT changes in General Education requirements.  
More information would help.
GRADUATE STUDENT ORGANIZATION REPORT – NICHOLAS FAHRENKOPF
The GSO held their elections on April 22nd and 23rd. The 2010-2011 GSO Executive Board includes: 
President Heidi Nicholls (Anthropology), 
Vice-President Sarah Taylor (Anthropology), 
Treasurer Yin Wang (Business), and 
MCAA Chair Jema Clements (Africana Studies).
 Nicholas Fahrenkopf (Nanobioscience) was elected as the Lead Senator to the University Senate and as University Council Representative. 
Zakhar Berkovich is graduating this semester from the School of Education. He has served for the past two years on the University Senate, 
ULC and CAA-
STUDENT ASSOCIATION REPORT -- DUSTIN LANTERMAN
Nothing to report.
MSCHE Steering Committee Report – Reed Hoyt, University Senate Representative
Nothing to report.
CAA (Council on Academic Assessment) – Heidi Andrade, Chair
The Council on Academic Assessment met on the 14th and the 22nd of April. The agendas included a discussion of a revised draft job description 
for departmental assessment coordinators and a review of a proposed amendment to the sections of the Senate Charter that describe the charges 
of the Council on Academic Assessment and its committees (Section X.6). We discussed the drafts of both the Graduate and Undergraduate 
Education sections of the Strategic Plan, and shared our feedback with their respective task force chairs. Finally, we reviewed, revised and 
approved the Program Review Committee reports for Computer Science and History. 
CAFFECoR (Committee on Academic Freedom, Freedom of Expression, and 
Community Responsibility) – Susanna Fessler, Chair
The Chair of CAFFECoR met with the Vice President for Student Success on Tuesday, May 4 to go over the final revisions to the “Community 
Rights and Responsibilities” document. All CAFFECoR suggestions and concerns have been addressed with one exception—the policy on 
internet usage is still under revision by the Chief Information Officer. To make the CRR more user friendly, however, Student Success plans to 
re-format the document with links to pertinent campus offices and policies. When that is done, the part of the CRR that addresses internet usage 
will link to ITS (instead of reiterating the ITS policy verbatim). The University Council will consider the new CRR draft at its next meeting.
CERS (Committee on Ethics in Research and Scholarship) – John Monfasani, Chair
Nothing to report.
COR (Council on Research) – James Castracane, Chair
At its final academic year meeting of COR on May 3rd:
1). The FRAP B award recommendations from the Colleges/Schools were presented by IVPR Dias: 21 awards out of 31 applicants were funded 
totaling $70,872. 
The COR members approved the motion to accept.
2). The Benevolent Awards Review Sub-committee chaired by Professor Lewis presented their recommendations: 7 awards out of 17 applicants 
were funded totaling $3,500. 
The COR members approved the motion to accept.
3). COR voted to recommend both the Institute for RNA Science and Technology and the Institute for Financial Market Regulation official 
permanent University status.
CPCA (Council on Promotions and Continuing Appointments) – Carlos Rodriguez, Chair
CPCA met on Friday April 16th and again on Thursday April 22nd. 
William Hedberg and the CPCA's chair also met with the university wide ad-hoc CLUE committee on Tenure and Promotion on Thursday April 
22nd. 
Here are the CLUE group main questions for CPCA: 
· We are very interested in understanding the extent of variability that exists in the tenure and promotion process. Can you tell us how 
much variability in expectations (both for tenure and for promotion to full) you see across departments, and whether you see this variability
as problematic in any way? 
· Similarly, from your vantage point of seeing completed dossiers, how much variability in the process of assembling and shepherding cases
do you see? (For example, is there a lot of difference in what the actual cases end up looking like? Differences in how cases are put together
or in the process departments use in putting cases together?) 
· Given that there is an abundance of Associate Professors across the UA, what are the major issues here at UA we should be aware of 
related to promotion from Associate to Full Professor? 
From your perspective, what is needed to better support and mentor associate professors as they move toward promotion to full? What role 
could CPCA and/or the Provost’s office potentially play in this process, especially for small departments where there are few full professors
available to be mentors or to shepherd promotion cases. 
· We are concerned with the concept of 'tainting' of external reviewers. Can you share any insights about the selection of external reviewers 
in general, and CPCA’s current thoughts about 'tainting' in particular? 
· The final question overlaps somewhat with the previous ones, but what do you feel works well in UA’s tenure and promotion system, and 
what do you feel could work better/needs some attention? 
In summary the CLUE group is concerned with: 1) How to handle the great increase in variability of cases across our increasingly diverse 
university. 2) How to choose objective external reviewers. 3) How to solve the UA-wide large Accumulation of Associate Professors Problem.
GAC (Graduate Academic Council) – Laurence Kranich, Chair
Prior to its meeting on May 7, GAC submitted comments on the Graduate Education section of the draft Strategic Plan. At the meeting, the 
Council was joined by the new Dean of Graduate Studies, Kevin Williams. As the first item of business, the Council acted upon three grievances 
before its Committee on Admissions and Academic Standing. It also approved four proposals before its Committee on Curriculum and 
Instruction: 
(1) a request to change the name of the Biopsychology PhD program to Behavioral Neuroscience, 
(2) a request to drop the GRE Subject Test in Psychology for PhD applicants to the Social/Personality program, 
(3) a request to drop the GRE Subject Test in Psychology for PhD applicants to the Biopsychology/Behavioral Neuroscience program, and 
(4) a proposal to revise the Computer Science MS program in such a way that is suitable as a terminal MS degree and for those wishing to pursue
a Certificate in Professional Science Management. 
Next, the Chair informed the Council that due to the late date of designing an appropriate process for GAC review of CAA assessments, he 
suggested to the Chair of CAA that such reviews begin in the fall and that this may require special sessions due to the backlog of cases. 
The Council then discussed the Graduate Education section of the draft Strategic Plan and members’ comments with the incoming Dean.
GOV (Governance Council) – Eric Lifshin, Chair 
GOV continues its discussions regarding the Senate Handbook. 
At its May 6 meeting, GOV responded to a request to replace a member and add a new representative to the ad hoc General Education Task 
Force. The council also continued its compilation of types of requests it receives in its role as “committee on committees”; this will be passed on 
to next year’s GOV to indicate requests that are cyclical vs. ad hoc, those that are mandated (by Bylaws, University policy, etc.), requests of an 
“advisory” nature, and those that meet the conditions of “formal consultation.
GOV also began discussing implementation recommendations on Senate Resolution 0910-02, “Faculty Evaluation of Administrators and 
Administrative Services and Functions.” The council will seek detailed information (instruments, forms, frequency of assessments, etc.) from 
SUNY Senators from Binghamton and Stony Brook.
LISC (Council on Libraries, Information Systems, and Computing) – Gwen Moore, 
Chair
The University images database was demonstrated using Luna software. Images, audio and video are being entered into this institutional 
repository, with over 5000 images provided by the Art Department, Art Museum, and Writers Institute have been digitized so far. Mark Wolfe of 
Libraries Special Collection is developing the database. The dataset can be viewed at http://Lexington.univ.albany.edu/luna .
The Libraries now have an EBSCO discovery tool (beta version) available online as well as the American History and Video Collection that has 
videos, newsreels, documentaries and other material in a searchable database. 
ITS is beginning an evaluation of email and calendaring services on campus. Meetings with stakeholders are being held now; evaluation of 
products will take place over the summer with results and reports in the fall.
UAC (Undergraduate Academic Council) – Joan Savitt, Chair
In addition to the bills UAC is bringing to the May 12 Senate meeting (Globalization Major; Earth & Atmos. Sci.; changes to S/U policy made in 
response to recommendations received at the April Senate meeting; and our bill proposing a path to a degree which does not require completion 
of a minor, already discussed in April but now presented for a vote), we report that we have approved changes to the Chemistry Major, 
Comprehensive Forensics in accord with the recommendations of their accreditors; we are likely to have approved course changes and 
subsequent small changes to the CNSE Honors program by the end of the term. 
UAC approved the discontinuation of several minors, in Chemistry and in Public Health. These bills are being studied by the UPPC now and will
come to the floor if approved there. The discontinuations of certain minors in Chemistry were approved by UAC without dissent as very few 
students are involved and the rationale is clear. The request to discontinue the minor in Public Health was opposed by some on UAC on the 
grounds that this is a popular option for students that should not be withdrawn. The proposal that was approved by UAC did allow for all students
already declared to finish the minor and for those who had not yet declared but who will have completed at least half of it by the start of the fall, 
2010 semester to declare it. SPH otherwise proposes to offer a 3-course sequence which it would open to larger numbers of students who would 
not be able to minor in the field but who could be admitted as majors if qualified.
UAC also approved the formation of a General Education Advisory Group, following recommendations from the Strategic Planning group and 
the Middle States evaluation team. Because input is also needed from the Governance Council before the full Senate can vote on it, this bill is not
being brought forward at the meeting. This advisory group has been designed to be able to take on the work currently being performed by the 
Gen Ed Task Force formed by the Senate once the Task Force is discharged. As currently proposed, unlike the Task Force, it will include 
representatives from all the academic areas required by the Trustees. The advisory group will serve as a resource to the Dean of Undergraduate 
Education as well as to UAC and its Gen Ed committee which will continue to bring legislation to the Senate if changes in policy are to be 
recommended.
ULC (University Life Council) – Daniel R. Smith, Chair
ULC heard a report on an upcoming NYS Audit of Cleary Act compliance for the UAlbany campus; the audit is part of the Comptroller's audit of
campuses state-wide.
 UPPC (University Planning and Policy Council) – John Delano, Chair
The UPPC met on Friday, April 23, to discuss three items on its agenda. 
(A) Proposal from the School of Business to resume admission to the Organizational Studies Ph.D. program: The UPPC began its discussion of 
this proposal at its April 9th meeting. Questions and comments arising from that discussion were subsequently e-mailed to Dean Donald Siegel 
and Prof. Gary Yukl, who were invited to attend the April 23rd meeting to discuss the proposal. The UPPC considered the resource implications of
this program, and learned that no additional faculty lines were required and that students would be externally funded. The UPPC voted 
unanimously in support of the proposal. 
(B) Current draft of the University’s strategic planning document: UPPC members provided comments and suggestions to Provost Phillips and a 
subset of co-chairs of the committees responsible for the six strategic goals. 
(C) In response to the UPPC Motion passed at its March 26th meeting, the Office of Finance and Business provided the UPPC chair and Senate 
chair with 11 pages of spreadsheets on annual NYS funding to UAlbany and all other SUNY campuses from 2000-2001 through 2009-2010. 
UPPC members received photocopies of those spreadsheets at the April 23rd meeting.
The UPPC met on Friday, May 7, to discuss the following four proposals: 
(A) changes to the undergraduate program at the School of Public Health; 
(B) suspension of admission to the B.A. program in Earth and Atmospheric Sciences; 
(C) suspension of admission to the 3-2 program in Chemical Engineering; and 
(D) suspension of admission to B.S. program in Chemistry - Materials Emphasis. All four of these proposals were approved by the UPPC.
OLD BUSINESS
Resolution on Higher Education Empowerment and Innovation Act:
This e item had been placed was on the agenda offor last month’s meeting by a vote of the Senate, but due to time 
constraints and failure to extend the meeting, it could not be be acted upon, and hence it was placed back on the 
agenda.  Chair Range noted that after the last SUNY Plenary meeting, the SUNY Senate Executive Committee 
formulated and approved a resolution that expresses support for the principles of the PHEEIA legislation and 
provides a list of areas that should be addressed.  This resolution voted to approve the legislation and it has now 
been overwhelmingly endorsed by the full SUNY Senate at the recent plenary meeting at the end of April.  The 
resolution before the Senate today would endorse the resolution passed by the SUNY Senate.   The resolution 
expresses support for the principles of the legislation and provides a list of areas that should be addressed.  Chair 
Range opened the floor for discussion.  Senator Cupoli objected to statements in the resolution that appeared to 
impose restrictions on the Chancellor.  Senator Fernando Leiva spoke in opposition of the resolution, citing 
parallels to developments in Chile that damaged higher education.  He spoke at length about underlying political 
agendas.  After several minutes Chair Range interrupted him and urged him to focus his remarks on the motion 
before the Senate.  Senator Leiva continued, and eventually Chair Range urged him to bring his remarks to closure.
Senator Fahrenkopf made a motion to limit the debate to two minutes per person.  The motion was seconded and 
approved by a vote.  and provided several arguments for his opposition.  Senator  Leiva has provided an Open 
Letter to the University Senate explaining his position and that letter appears at the end of these minutes (Appendix
I).
Chair Range asked for a motion to limit the debate to two minutes per person.  A motion was made and seconded, 
and approved by a vote.
Jackie Hayes, a research assistant expressed concern that SUNY not lose sight of its core mission.  She would like 
to see that SUNY remain accessible to everyone.  She believes that tuition would be increased to meet a price 
index which would translate into large annual increases and cited such incidents.  Ms. Hayes asked to have the 
discussion tabled.
Senator Nicholas Fahrenkopf, from the Graduate Student Organization, stated that the SUNY wide Student 
Assembly passed a resolution in support of PHEEIA.  UPPC Chair John Delano added that UPPC dedicated two 
and half hours of meeting time to a detailed discussion of the resolution and voted unanimously to support it.
Vince Delio from the President’s Office provided some factual data on the act and reasons for Chancellor 
Zimpher’s show of support for it.   He provided figures for state allocations received over the past twenty years.  In
1989 UAlbany received an allocation of $78 million.  Today we have the same allocation but have received $70 
million in cuts over the years.   Tuition increases are not invested in SUNY but are used to address the state’s 
budget deficits.  The Chancellor is trying to provide SUNY with the ability to exercise better control over its 
finances.  part of our future such as protecting access and affordability.  Money would be set aside to ensure that 
students on for those in need and would protect the TAP population to handlewould be protected from tuition any 
increases. going forward.   New York is one of the only three states that require legislative re-appropriation ofes  
tuition dollars.
Jill Hanifan from the English Department voiced concern that PHEEIA is an incentive for hiring part-time, non-
tenured track faculty and believes PHEEIA needs clarification on this before it is passed.  Provost Phillips 
addressed those concerns later in the discussion.  She clarified that the money received under the legislation would 
absolutely go to hiring full time faculty.  We would have an opportunity to hire 500 full-time faculty and she 
assured that the intent of the resolutionlegislation is for to increase the number of full-time, tenure track faculty.
School of Education DeanSenator Robert Bangert-Drowns, Dean of  the School of Education,  said he favored the 
resolution.  He added that SUNY has been massively underfunded and has seen resources dwindle over the last 
twenty years in relationship to what we should be receiving in terms of inflation.  Senator Tom Bessette voiced 
similar concerns stating that in order to keep our institution functional, money needs to come from somewhere.  
The cuts of the past two years have left no money to hire faculty.
Chair Range asked for aA motion was made to table the debate as had been requested earlier in the meeting.  A 
motion wasThe motion was  made and seconded to do so  but was defeated by a voted.  A motion was then made to
close the debate and it was approved by a voted.  The Senate members then voted to support voted to endorse the 
resolution.  and it was approved by a vote.
CERS Revisions of Misconduct Policy:
CERS Chair Monfasani opened the discussion.   He spoke with Legal Counsel John Reilly prior the meeting who 
raised two objections.  One was the right of the complainant to submit objections concerning membership of the 
inquiry committee.  (My notes were a bit cryptic but when I looked at the policy I think this is what was 
referenced.)  The second issue concerns the release from confidentiality imposed ongranted the complainant after a
final resolution.  Chair Monfasani believes that CERS should continue to negotiate with the administration.  He 
further stated that should a vote defeat the revisions to the policy today, CERS would have to start over next year. 
Chair Monfasani’s preference is to table the bill and go forward since there is clarity on what the issues are.  He 
asked for a motion to postpone the bill until these issues are resolved, but recommended that a time limit be 
imposed until the beginning end of the fall semester.  Carolyn MacDonald voiced concern that the bill would go 
before a new membership of the CERS committee and would like to see it brought to the Senate by the October 
meeting. of the Senate.
GOV Chair Lifshin raised a concern that should the bill be passed by the Senate but not be acceptable by to Legal 
Counsel, the President would not sign it.  He asked Mr. Reilly if 90 days seemed to be a reasonable amount of time
to resolve the issues.  Mr. Reilly responded that there have been productive discussions.  These are important 
issues but he believes they are inconsistent with federal regulations.  He does not see a problem with coming to a 
meeting of the minds and bringing this to a conclusion in 90 days.  
The Senate vote to postpone the bill until the October Senate meeting was approved.
Policy on S/U Grading (UAC):
The bill was returned to UAC after the April meeting for further clarifications.  The bill limits students to two 
courses of “S/U” grading in courses below the 300 level during their academic career.  UAC Chair Savitt said 
students would be blocked by our computer system from registering for a third course.   The bill was passed by a 
vote favoring its approval.
Proposal to Alternative to a Minor (UAC):
The bill was introduced at the April Senate meeting and the discussion continued.  UAC Chair Savitt reviewed the 
provisions of the bill, informing the Senate that the bill would not eliminate minors but provide an additional path 
for students to earn alternative credit at the 300 level or above.  The bill allows for advanced work completed at 
another university to be accepted.  UAC has not received any comments for or against the bill since it was 
introduced to the Senate last month.  Chair Range opened the floor for additional questions and comments.
ULC Chair Smith opposed the bill on the grounds that it would have a negative impact on smaller academic units.  
He pointed out recent legislation that limited the Education minor last year and an item on the current agenda to 
suspend the minor in Public Health, further limiting the options available to students.  Senator Pipkin stated that 
minors such as those from CCI are attractive in the job market and would look good on a transcript.  He further 
stated that 24 credits would not make any particular impact, leaving a student to regret the decision to opt out of a 
minor.  Chair Savitt said that it would be the responsibility of Advisement to present both options.
UAC member JoAnne Malatesta said that at our sister schools where minors are not required, about 30% of student
elect to take a minor. Most students go above and beyond the required program minimums.  She added that in 
order for students to fulfill minor requirements, the University made over 500 exceptions to existing minor 
requirements during the fall semester.
Questions continued to arise concerning the number of credits required for the alternative.  Chair Savitt said UAC 
selected 24 credits to represent upper level work done by major and minors.  If the Senate feels it should be higher,
UAC would consider it friendly amendment or if objections are on the grounds of rigor it could be raised.  UPPC 
Chair Delano said this was his concern.  Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education Faerman had indicated that our
sister institutions that do not have minors require 39 credits at the 300 level and he felt the proposal for 24 credits 
were too low.
A question came from the floor about having a two-tiered system for students transferring to UAlbany with an 
associate’s degree.  Secretary Collier stated that since more than two-thirds of undergraduates are in majors that do 
not require a minor, this eliminates the minor requirement for a large portion of our student.  This is unfair to the 
one-third who are taking combined majors and minors.  If the goal is to be equitable, part of the 24 credits would 
have to be completed outside of the major or balance with a minor requirements and a portion would need to be 
upper level outside of the major area.  We would need a list of the 300 level courses.   (Dick needs to review this!)
A motion was made to extend the meeting an additional fifteen minutes and approved
Senator Merbler asked what is driving the 500 exceptions per semester.  JoAnne Malatesta said a number of 
students, including transfers, are unable to obtain courses they need.  Almost of all of these are graduating seniors. 
Students are requesting to have courses “shoe horned” into their minor and are desperate for the course work they 
need.
Senator Berman spoke in favor of the bill.  He said at first he did not understand the need for the change but over 
time realized the discrepancy in theory and practice of requiring a minor.  He said the practice of having a minor 
for all students is problematic and he came to the conclusion that the proposal is a good alternative not but does not
support eliminating the minor.
Professor Reed Hoyt from the Music Department spoke in opposition.  He believes students need more guidance 
and minors give them structure.  Minors are potential career path.  He asked how this might affect the School of 
Education whose only contact with undergraduates is through the minor.  He further stated that if the bill is 
approved, every department should be encouraged to create a departmental major.  In closing, Professor Hoyt cited
a situation of a student in his department who started out a vocal major.  Unsure of what her career path would be, 
she decided to take Journalism as a minor.  The former student is now a journalist with a local news channel and 
would not be there if she had not enrolled in the Journalism minor.
A motion was made, seconded, and approved to closeThe debate. was closed and  Chair Range then asked for a 
voted on the bill.  The bill was defeated by of a vote of 14 approving the bill and 23 disapproving.
Progress Report on General Education (GE Task Force Chair Stephen North): 
Stephen North, Chair of the General Education Task Force, informed the Senate that the task force met with a 
sense of urgency earlier in the semester to meet a March 19th deadline in response to the revised SUNY policy on 
general education.  The task force met three times and concluded that it would be imprudent to make any hasty 
changes.  In the aftermath of the Strategic Planning and the Middle States review, UAlbany’s program has been 
studied extensively and the task force aims to bring recommendations for change to the Senate in the fall.
Chair Range added that there is substantial opportunity for everyone to provide feedback and he encouraged all to 
do so.
NEW BUSINESS
Organizational Studies (GAC, UPPC):
GAC Chair Kranich opened the discussion.  The proposal would reactivate the doctoral program in Organizational 
Studies.  This is a small but successful program and has the support of Dean Siegel in the School of Business.  The 
job market for students in this discipline is very strong.  GAC was concerned about resource implications but it 
would be fully supported and self funded by the School of Business.  UPPC Chair Delano confirmed this in 
discussions UPPC had with Dean Siegel.  A motion to approve the bill was made and seconded, and the bill passed.
Faculty-Initiated Interdisciplinary Major in Globalization Studies (UAC):
UAC Chair Savitt discussed the proposal which was briefly discussed at the December Senate meeting.  The bill 
would deactivate the combined major/minor in Globalization Studies.  Additionally, the bill is a restructuring of the
36 credit major.  A motion was made to approve the bill and seconded.  Before the vote was taken, UPPC Chair 
Delano inquired as to why the proposal was not forwarded to UPPC for review and asked if it had resource 
implications.  Chair Savitt informed him that it was agreed at the December Senate meeting that it would not have 
to go to UPPC.  CAS Dean Wulfert added that the proposal does not require any additional resources.
A motion made to extend the meeting was seconded and approved.  The vote was then taken and the bill was 
approved.
Suspension of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences BA (UAC):
Chair Savitt presented the bill which has been approved by UPPC.  The Department of Atmospheric and 
Environmental Sciences has stated in its rationale that the needs of the field have changed and the program is not 
preparing students for post-graduate success.  The department has asked that the BA program be eliminated in 
favor of others that will offer better training for students. 
Senator Candace Merbler asked for a count at this point to verify the presence of a quorum.  A count was taken and
the number of members present fell short of a quorum.  Chair Range informed those remaining that the discussion 
would continue and remaining agenda items would be covered this coming Friday, May 14th at 10:00 am 
in LC 4.  
 
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 5:20 pm.
Respectfully submitted by
Gail Cameron, Recorder 
Appendix I
An Open Letter to the University Senate
Neoliberalism, PHEEIA and the University at Albany (SUNY)
Senate Meeting of May 10, 2010:
Fernando Leiva 1
Associate Professor
[and yes, really, a University Senator (and to those from Arizona, yes a legal immigrant)]
University at Albany (SUNY)
At the May 10, 2010 University Senate meeting, I was prevented by the president of the 
University Senate from completing my statement against approval of the ill-named Public Higher 
Education and Empowerment Innovation Act (PHEEIA). He justified such action based on his opinion that my 
attempt to link PHEEIA to broader issues of a neoliberal strategy was irrelevant to the vote before the senate. 
While still trying to finish my brief statement, he encouraged approval of a quick motion limiting all statements on 
the matter to no more than two minutes, which was convenient since with the new rules quickly approved after I 
started speaking, my time had expired. 
As a result, my efforts to put PHEEIA in broader structural and historical context of a neoliberal attack on 
public institutions and the further commodification and corporate control over all aspects of social life were 
effectively quashed. In addition the Senate president questioned the legitimacy of my speaking up by asking in 
front of all those in attendance, “Sir, are you a University Senator?” 
I find this troubling on many levels and interpreted it as an overt strategy for suppressing alternative 
thought and delegitimizing “by othering.” After being at the University at Albany for 10 years, I could not but find 
it profoundly ironic, to say the least, that such a question ---“Are you a university senator?” that is, “Are you really
one of us?” – would be formulated at the start of the very same session in which the Senate also voted to revise the 
Globalization Studies Major, a faculty-initiated, “resource-neutral” major I contributed to create, shepherd and lead
for many years. Apparently, like millions of immigrants with and without papers, my free and cheap labor is 
acceptable, but my right to speak is not. 
The May 10, 2010 meeting underscored how poor real debate on a serious like PHEEIA took place in the 
Senate: More time could be spent and interest displayed on discussing the minutiae of how to tweak undergraduate 
S/U grading than on the implications of PHEEIA for the future of public higher education in New York state. 
Perhaps now in the privacy of your own office or home, you might feel more inclined to engage in critical 
thinking in such dearth at the May 10, 2010 Senate meeting. Ensconced in a safe space, where no one expects you 
to publicly exercise your right to an opinion or encounter the ancient democratic practice of parrhesia, a spark of 
curiosity or its vestiges, might lead you to read on as to why I believe that PHEEIA needs to be framed within a 
broader structural and historical context of neoliberalism, a key point I was not able to make. 
Here is some of what I was hoping to say. 
PHEEIA and the Neoliberal Strategy to Reorganize Class Power 
I believe that PHEEIA is part and parcel of the neoliberal strategy of deregulation and privatization that has
been applied over the past three decades in other parts of the world as well as the US. I will not mince words. 
PHEEIA is an effort to destroy and replace the institutions born out of the post-WWII labor-capital compromise 
that, in the US and many other parts, gave rise to the so-called welfare state. In order to restore profitability, 
neoliberal strategy seeks to destroy those institutions and efface the foundational logic of such social arrangements 
from the public mind. It is a strategy that aims to replace these with institutions and modes of thinking that can 
better and more fully serve capital accumulation and the profit motive. This entails reforming, reorganizing and 
recalibrating the state and public institutions like the State University of New York. 
This is a vast undertaking. After almost 40 years of such efforts, neoliberalism shows discernible patterns 
and outcomes that have been studied in detail. I believe that such patterns and outcomes need to be considered 
when assessing the implications of PHEEIA for the University at Albany (SUNY). 
Here are only a few of them. 
Create a crisis, then manage the crisis to destroy public institutions: “disaster capitalism” 
As an economist with an interest in economic development and political economy, I have spent the last two 
decades studying the impact of neoliberal restructuring on the economy, politics and society. Focused on Latin 
America, and paying special attention to Chile, the “pioneer” in neoliberal restructuring, I find striking similarities 
between the experience of how neoliberalism was imposed in Latin American and how PHEEIA is been deployed 
in the SUNY system. 
Many scholars including David Harvey, have indicated that neoliberalism must really be understood as a 
system of “crisis creation and crisis management” to promote privatization, deregulation and liberalization of the 
economy and the transformation of power relations in society. Naomi Klein’s best-seller, “The Shock Doctrine” 
describes this as “disaster capitalism.” Only a when policy makers have succeeded in producing a crisis-shocked 
people and country, can resistance to “free-market” policies be finally overcome. To convince citizens that public 
institutions need to be privatized, neoliberal planners deploy what has become by now a well-tested plan: Begin by
starving public institutions of adequate funding, leading to the growing inability of such institutions to fully 
accomplish their mission. As dissatisfaction with their performance rises, take advantage of a serious crisis, then 
offer the solution to what seems like an intractable problem: privatization, deregulation. 
Whether a public utility, a state corporation managing a country’s key resource, a public university, or an 
entire nation, the strategy of “disaster capitalism” has been applied time and time again in Latin America, Europe, 
Africa, Asia and North America. 
By systematically under funding the SUNY/CUNY system for years, and in the midst of the most serious 
budget crisis in decades, PHEEIA is now presented as the magic bullet, the lifeboat, which will save and solve all 
our problems. 
At the May 10, 2010 Senate meeting, the neoliberal strategy of “disaster capitalism” worked like a charm. 
We were told, “Approve the Principles Now; Details will be Worked Out Later; PHEEIA will save you.” 
Social polarization and the Hollowing out of Democratic Institutions 
Neoliberalism’s blue-print of privatization, deregulation, and liberalization has indeed contributed in some 
places, certainly not all, to reestablish macroeconomic equilibria and relaunch export growth but it has achieved 
this at tremendously high and unnecessary social and economic costs. Medical jargon is often used. “Cut of the 
limb to save the patient!” “Pain is the path to Prosperity!” “If you are going to cut of the cat’s tail, you have to do it
in one swift swoop!” However, in absolutely all countries where these policies have been applied, social 
polarization has risen and democratic institutions have been hollowed out of real democratic content. 
Instead of fulfilling their role as the vehicle through which citizens can regulate the market and curtail the 
class, racial, ethnic, and gender differences inherent to capitalist accumulation, neoliberal strategy seeks to fully 
subordinate all institutions, including public ones, to the logic of the market and profit motive. Where successfully 
implemented, invariably those who have ended up benefiting the most has been the tiny minority at the very top of 
the income pyramid. 
Instead of a potent force for promoting civic engagement, citizenship, social integration, and knowledge 
about our changing world, PHEEIA ensures that SUNY and the University at Albany will continue down the path 
of increased corporatization. PHEEIA will ensure that SUNY and the University at Albany becomes more 
responsive to corporate capital; not remain wholly attentive t to fulfill the broader social, political, educational and 
cultural objectives of local communities and the people of the state of New York. PHEEIA must be seen as part of 
a broader agenda, which like the US Supreme Court’s recent decision to allow unlimited and secret corporate 
contributions to political campaigns, ultimately undermines democracy. 
A New “Common Sense:” Commodifying Every interstice of Social Life 
PHEEIA also needs to be examined in the broader context of efforts to culturally and ideologically 
legitimize a “new common sense” for New York State: a transition from a past where public higher education was 
envisioned as a means for social integration, upward mobility, a broad based education, and citizenship, to a 
present and future in which the mission of public education is reformulated to promote economic competitiveness, 
“entrepreneurship” and the harnessing of knowledge production to profits and profit-driven entities. Normalizing 
such ideational and cultural shift is the ultimate goal of neoliberal crisis production and crisis management. 
I was engaging only in mild satire when I was interrupted mid-statement by the Senate president as I 
cautioned that in the future, PHEEIA would lead to departments being evaluated primarily by how much private 
funding and how many “public-private partnerships” they broker. 
PHEEIA prepares us to aspire to see and welcome at the University at Albany (SUNY) new forms of 
public-private partnerships such as the “Goldman Sachs Freshman Semester on Morality and Ethics;” the “Wal-
Mart Endowed Chair for Community Social Welfare;” the “British Petroleum/Halliburton Joint Professorship on 
Sustainable Coastal Ecology” and my personal favorite, the “Coca Cola/Chiquita/United Fruit Endowed 
Professorship of Human Rights in Latin America.” Under the new strategic doctrine of the “entrepreneurial 
university” and PHEEIA “principles,” our students, faculty and administrators will be groomed to see no nothing 
strange or questionable about it. 
PHEEIA encourages us to dream, to dream that we will finally have a faculty lounge at the University at 
Albany, but only if we can convince McDonalds, Pizza Hut or Altria to generously sponsor it, albeit in exchange 
for an exclusive ten year contract and tasteful product placement in our classes and commencement events. Don’t 
we have something akin to that already with Coca Cola and Barnes & Noble? Why not explore such possibilities to
the fullest? 
The more corporate capitalism colonizes previously existing public institutions or previously non-
commodified spaces, the more “flexibility” the University at Albany will have to achieve its newly defined 
mission. This is what the PHEEIA “principles” and SUNY administrators enthusiastically promise. 
Chile and Greece Can Indeed Teach Lessons to SUNY Albany 
It is erroneous to believe that the experiences of Chile in the 1970s and 1980s or of Greece in 2010 have 
nothing to do with what is being planned under PHEEIA for the University at Albany and SUNY system. Perhaps 
through deeply ingrained belief in “US exceptionalism,” you might think that the history of neoliberalism in these 
two countries is irrelevant to the debate on PHEEIA. 
However, if you take the time to inform yourself, you might find multiple and very direct connections that I
sketch only very briefly here. 
US historian Steve Volk suggests, for example, that despite their geographical distance and evident 
asymmetries, Chile and the US are much more closely linked than one would think.  US elites and planners have 
used Chile, he argues, as a testing ground for policies that then are deployed in these very United States. Such 
policies contributed to destroy Chile’s democracy and the liberal state, establish a national security 
doctrine/neoliberal state after 1973 which fostered neoliberal policies such as the privatization of social security, 
public health and education. Volk’s point is that after being tested in Chile, they are then deployed in the US.2 It is 
no coincidence that the co-director of the Cato Institute’s program to privatize the US social security was no other 
than Jose Piñera, Pinochet’s Minister of Labor and the architect of privatizing social security in Chile. Do your 
own research and discover how well Piñera`s policy turned out for Chileans.3 
This is the reason why in my statement to the May 10, 2010 Senate meeting I tried to explain why a “post-
PHEEIA SUNY” could be envisaged by examining the situation of public education in Chile today. Decades of 
neoliberal strategy, applied first through the iron fist of the Pinochet dictatorship and then through the velvet glove 
of “free-market democracy,” ended up destroying Chile’s highly admired public higher education system. 
For the past 30 years, student and faculty mobilizations have tried to restore Chile’s public education 
system to what it once was. At the election for the new Chancellor of the University of Chile taking place this 
week, one can see how PHEEIA-like policies have reshaped faculty governance; faculty voices now come in three 
Goldilocks-like separate sizes: those whose voices count for 1/8 vote, for ½ vote, or for 1 full vote depending on 
whether the “permanent” faculty member stepping into the voting booth has been hired for less than 6 hours, 
between 7 and 22 hours, or more than 22 hours. Starved for funds, the University at Albany 
(SUNY), like other SUNY campuses, has increasingly resorted to hiring contingent, part-time faculty that carry out
almost 50% of the teaching load. Chile shows were PHEEIA will lead in a couple of years: an even more 
fragmented and tiered faculty than what we already have. 
In the SUNY Albany’s enactment of the “shock doctrine” and “disaster capitalism,” the  Senate voted to 
approve the PHEEIA “principles,” trusting that “details” such as tuition hikes, collective bargaining, procurement 
policies, public-private partnerships, and decisions over work arrangements would be worked out in the future. 
Yet, believe it or not, Greece can also offer a stark example of what can happen when those details are not 
discussed beforehand. The so-called “Greek” bailout, in reality an effort to save the heavily exposed German and 
French banks by imposing internal-devaluation and by purposefully shrinking the economy to restore profitability, 
and unload the costs of the adjustment on the working class and the poor. 
Costas Panoyakis, an Associate Professor of Social Studies at CUNY, clearly draws such linkages, 
connections which in a much less eloquent fashion, I was not allowed to make at the May 10, 2010 Senate 
meeting. Professor Panoyakis points out: 
Governor David Paterson recently called for yet another round of cuts for CUNY and SUNY and proposed
to make it easier for universities to raise tuition. If approved, these measures would continue to shift the 
cost of public higher education from the city and the state onto the students. Education is on its way to 
becoming just another commodity accessible only to those who can afford to buy it. 
The situation faced in New York and throughout the United States may not be quite as dramatic as that in 
Greece, but the pattern is the same. Those most responsible for the global crisis have shifted the burden of 
the crisis to the rest of us — whether it be Greek workers facing lower incomes and higher prices, U.S. 
public college students paying higher tuition for an educational experience diminished by relentless budget
cuts or ordinary Americans financing Wall Street bailouts even as they are losing their jobs and homes.4 
For the revitalization of critical thinking and a genuinely democratic space at SUNY 
UAlbany 
But there also exist huge differences between Greece and SUNY Albany. While in Greece such policies 
have led to popular mobilizations, in the US a movement protesting neoliberal strategies and policies such as 
PHEEIA is still in its infancy. 
In the US and in New York, financial speculators have been bailed out to continue speculating with billions 
of dollars of public resources with hardly a peep. 
At the University of Albany (SUNY), PHEEIA was voted after allowing only six to ten minutes of debate 
with nary a bleat! 
The May 10, 2010 University Senate meeting suggests that before being able to draw such connections, we 
need to fulfill an even more basic prerequisite: protect the University Senate as a genuinely democratic space, 
where difference of opinion, and conversations about complex issues are encouraged and the spirit of free speech 
prevails. 
Evidently I do not expect you to agree with me or share my views (or analysis) of PHEEIA, neoliberalism, 
or my assessment of the Senate meeting. 
But if after 10 years of working at the University at Albany, I still have to educate you so that you can see 
me as a legitimate member of this community, so that am allowed to speak and be heard with a minimal level of 
respect, then I can only ask: 
Whose problem is it? What is the name of this problem? 
If you answer those questions, even if just for yourself, then perhaps the much needed conversation and actions to 
defend public higher education from neoliberalism can really begin. 
________________________
1Department of Latin American, Caribbean and US Latino Studies. Author of Latin American 
Neostructuralism: The Contradictions of Post-Neoliberal Development (University of Minnesota 
Press, 2008); Editor of the Review of International Political Economy 
2Steve Volk, “Chile and the United States: Thirty Years Later, Return of the Repressed,” in Democracy in Chile: 
The Legacy of September 11, 1973. Edited by S. Nagy-Zekmi and F. Leiva (Sussex Academic Press, 2005). 
3Fernando Leiva, “Chile’s Privatized Social Security System: Behind the Free-Market Hype,” Connections, 
May/June 2005: 10-11. A fuller version is available at 
http://fleiva.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/leiva-socialsecurity.pdf 
4Costas Panoyakis, “Meltdown Greek Style” The Indypendent, April 21, 2010 
http://www.indypendent.org/2010/04/21/meltdown-greek-style/