Present: M. Apostolos, M. Baron, B. Brown, W. Dutton, J. Gates, R. Garet, R. Guralnick, W. Handley, N. Hanel (alternate for J. Toscan), E. Heikkila, C. Jacob, M. Jorgensen, M. Levitt, G. Loeb, W. Mack, J. Manegold, D. Mayer, E. McCann, J. Moore, S. Murphy, M. Nichol, P. Nosco, J. Nyquist, P. Pattengale, M. Renov, M. Safonov, G. Schierle, G. Shiflett, P. Shrivastava (alternate for W. Mack), G. Siegel, M. Stoner, M. Weinstein, W. Wolf, R. Zemke, F. Zufryden

Absent: F. Clark, R. Clark, E. Cooper, D. Larsen, P. Levine, B. Knight, V. Nguyen, M. Omar, D. Stram, N. Troy, W. Weber

Guests: L. Armstrong, T. Capretta, J. Hellige, M. Kann, B. Kosko, R. Labaree, M. Levine, W. Petak, D. Russell, C. Sioutas, C. Sullivan

Senate called to order at 2:47 p.m. by President Peter Nosco.

Meeting adjourned at 4:26 p.m.

Minutes approved as written with one abstention.

Provost Armstrong announced that Vice Provost Solomon has scheduled a symposium for April 19 entitled "Beyond Affirmative Action". He also announced that he has established the Center for Interdisciplinary Research. Proposals for grants from the Center will be out soon and each successful proposal will be funded up to $50,000. More information will be forthcoming from the Provost’s Office.

Provost Armstrong entertained questions and comments. One Senator wanted to know what was happening with the efforts to unionize TA’s. Provost Armstrong said that as far as he knew, union leaders were still trying to gather signatures for a vote to unionize. One Senator mentioned that his dean stated that faculty could not talk to the students about the issues since it might be perceived as placing an undo influence on the students. Provost Armstrong stated faculty have to be careful about what they say to TA’s about these issues since the whole University is bound by rules set forth by the National Labor Relations Board.

One Senator asked if the new Interdisciplinary Research Center was modeled after the one at the University of Chicago. Provost Armstrong said they did take the University of Chicago’s model into account when setting up the Center. He went on to say that he hoped the Center would foster cross-disciplinary research and link together some of the strengths we have at USC embedded within various departments and schools. For example, one outcome might be new doctoral programs that cut across several departments. History and economics were given as possible examples.

1) Nominating Committee The nominating committee has assembled a slate of candidates for the at-large positions on the Executive Board, and is near completion of a slate of candidates for the two Senate officer positions. President Nosco noted that it has been immensely gratifying to see how generously our colleagues have been responding to the call to serve.

2) Speaker Series Later this month Bruce Zuckerman from Religion will speak at midday on Wednesday, January 30 on "Technology and Texts: Case Studies from Biblical Times."

3) Campus parking Phil Chiaramonte, Associate V.P. for Business Affairs, will discuss at the February Senate meeting the proposed increase in rates for on-campus parking.

Ms. Capretta began with the history and description of USC Care’s clinic at University Park. The 865 square foot (two exam rooms and small lab space) clinic opened in 1994. Patient visits had increased to 4,934 annual visits by 2000-01 and at this point the space was inadequate for the volume of visits. Increasingly, patients were requesting additional services such as OB/GYN, which were not available due to the limited space. USC Care decided that it could provide better service to the faculty and staff users by moving the clinic to a downtown location. The new clinic will open later in January and will have twice the exam room space, space for a laboratory, and a pharmacy. In addition, services will include more OB/GYN, urology, and orthopedics. A study is currently underway to determine the quickest shuttle routes from the campus to the clinic, depending upon the time of the day and traffic. It is anticipated that the door to door time will be about six minutes.

Following her presentation, Ms. Capretta took questions from the floor:

Following the question period, one Senator stated the he felt that USC Care did not seek substantial faculty input regarding the move and was not responsive to earlier inquiries about USC Care’s plans. Ms. Capretta said she accepted the criticism, but stated that the move was necessary. At this point Professor Heikkila stated he felt moving the clinic was a reduction of services at University Park and offered a resolution which was seconded and passed (Yea, 17 and 4 Nay) after friendly amendments. Following is the resolution as passed.

President Nosco introduced the panel, Mark Kann, Political Science, who last year chaired the Academic Culture Initiative; Marcus Levitt, Slavic Languages & Literature, who is this year’s chair of the Senate’s Committee on Academic Policies and Procedures; and Geoff Shiflett, Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, who is this year’s chair of the University Committee on Academic Programs and Teaching

Professor Kann started the informal discussion by making the following points: Faculty resistance to change is the greatest obstacle. How tuition dollars are divided when more than one school or department is involved is a second obstacle. He mentioned that this could be solved by the deans. The administration could help foster interdisciplinary activities by supporting junior faculty in obtaining funds to conduct interdisciplinary research.

Professor Levitt, mentioned he was offering his comments after conferring with members of the Committee on Academic Policies and Procedures, which he chairs, and Professors Geoffrey Shifflet, Mark Kann and Donald Miller. The large number of existing interdisciplinary programs at USC (124, as identified by Prof. Miller’s LAS Interdisciplinary Task Force) and the many recurring reports, task forces and white papers on interdisciplinary activities clearly indicate that the faculty of USC are strongly committed to and interested in furthering such activities. Many of these programs are truly innovative and cross disciplinary boundaries.

Professor Levitt went on to note that structural obstacles to interdisciplinary

activities arise from the basic fact that the university is divided into administrative and disciplinary units—departments, programs, schools—that often have disincentive(s) to crossing territorial lines. Interdisciplinary activities within schools or units are far easier to organize than between them.  It therefore seems appropriate in many cases that encouragement and incentives—passed down to deans and departments—come from the Provost’s office if USC is to pursue greater university-wide interdisciplinary activity.

Professor Levitt identified four major areas of interdisciplinary activity: 1) Instruction and coursework; 2) Individual research (including support for graduate and post-graduate study); 3) Larger scale institutional interdisciplinary undertakings (e.g., centers, programs); and 4) Interdisciplinary enrichment programs (for example, the Ahmanson Humanities Initiative). He further speculated on things that hinder these pursuits.

Professor Loeb distributed a draft of the policy along with suggested revisions to the policy. He mentioned that the policy is not yet ready to be presented to the Senate for approval, but he expects that it will be ready for the February meeting. He encouraged faculty to review the draft policy and get comments back to him and the Research Committee.

During the brief discussion it was mentioned that some faculty are skeptical about the whole incubator process, noting there are advantages to keeping "things" in the public domain. It was noted that the policy does not address developing relationships with venture capitalists. Finally, Vice Provost Sullivan said he was impressed with the process of developing the incubator policy for USC and noted that many good faculty have been involved.

President Nosco distributed copies of midterm reports from the various Senate Committees.