Academic Senate
Minutes
April 18, 2001
Present: D. Bohlinger, L. Brand, A. Crigler, W. Dappen, W. Dutton, R. Garet (alternate for E. Saks), J. Gates, N. Hanel, H. Kaslow, B. Knight, P. Knoll, B. Kosko, J. Kunc, T. Kuran, R. Labaree, W. Mack, J. Manegold, A. Mircheff, J. Moore, P. Nosco, J. Nyquist, S. O'Leary (alternate for S. Murphy), F. Potenza, M. Renov, H. Schor, D. Stram, D. Walsh, W. Weber, M. Weinstein, W. Wolf, F. Zufryden, B. Zuckerman
Absent: M. Apostolos, F. Clark, F. Feldman, D. Ghirardo, R. Goodyear, H. James, D. Larsen, M. Omar, J. Peters, B. Sarter, D. Sloane, S. Sobel, B. Solomon, M. Wincor
Guests: J.L. Anderson, L. Armstrong, G. Blount, Y. Chen, M. Levine, R. Lubman, J. Odell, D. Stuart, G. Thalmann, C. Zachary
Senate called to order at 2:40 p.m. by President William Dutton.
Meeting adjourned at 4:47 p.m.
Action taken by the Senate:
Approval of March 21, 2001 Senate Minutes (Agenda item #2)
Minutes were approved as written without objection pending acceptance by the Secretary General and the Senate President of an insertion drafted by Professor Kunc. Approved minutes with the accepted insertion are attached.
The insertion follows this paragraph: Discussion from the floor covered several issues. One issue is that the policy might possibly create two classes of faculty (those who could receive 50% vs. 33 1/3% royalty for inventions). There was a question about the actual percentage an inventor would be receiving (a faculty member would not be getting 33 1/3% of the royalties, but rather 33 1/3% after the first 15% is taken off the top). The insertion reads: A Senator from Engineering asked at which meeting of the Senate Research Committee that the committee voted on the proposed IP policy. Professor Arbib and Vice-Provost Sullivan could not recall.Approval of Resolution 00/01-07: Tenure Clock Extension (Agenda item #4)
Approved as modified by the Senate (yea=12, nay=10, abstaining=1).
Announcements by President Dutton (Agenda item #1)
The President reminded everyone of the 9 May Senate Recognition Dinner at El Cholo's from 6 pm. Senators should send any remaining nominations for the Senate's Distinguished Service Award to Hilary Schor, who is chairing the awards committee, as soon as possible. Service and other awards will be given at the dinner. (An informal invitation was distributed.)
The 3rd and 4th issues of the Faculty Forum will be combined into a special issue on the changing geography of USC, featuring articles on distance education, distributed learning and our international initiatives. The 2nd issue, focused on the library, is in press.
The Senate Speakers' Series continues:
(see http://www.usc.edu/academe/acsen/calendar/speakerseries.htm)
-Tomorrow, 19 April, there will be a talk by NYU Professor Mitchell Moss on "Creativity, Connectivity and the Future of Urban Areas". The Senate is co-sponsoring this talk with the Provost's Urban Initiative Project on 'Information, Technology and Space' in the School for Policy, Planning and Development.
-On 2 May from 12-2 pm, the Senate is co-sponsoring a talk by Dr. Liang Guo on "Will the Internet Really Change China?" Dr Guo is Vice Director of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences' Center for Studies in Social Development. Last year he took Madeline Albright on a tour of Beijing's Internet Cafes.
There is room for only a few additional participants in a 10am-2pm special Academic Senate meeting with the University's new consultant on distance education, Alan Arkatov and his staff, along with Dean Jerry Campbell. Members of the Distance Education and Distributed Learning Committee, the Executive Board and the Courseware Subcommittee of the Research Committee have been invited, but an invitation has gone out to all Senators and faculty for the few remaining seats. In addition, leaders from the student senates will be joining this session, which will focus on the various hopes, fears and suggestions of faculty as one means for ensuring more input into this planning process.
The President passed out a brochure on the Emeriti Center, urging Senators to review the document and pass it on to senior faculty who may benefit from knowing more about the activities of this group. Their plans for the years ahead are included in the back jacket, including an initiative in distance learning. Also see: http://www.usc.edu/org/emeriti_center
The President thanks all the Senators who commented on the draft Academic Senate brochure. The text has been finalized and the flyer is being designed. Many suggestions were incorporated, but some suggestions, which aimed at adopting the language and style of the Senate Constitution and by-laws, were not. It was felt that we needed a document that could reach faculty who are not necessarily interested in the more technical aspects of Senate governance.
Promoting Free Speech at USC: The President noted that the 9 April DT article, entitled "Student cited for passing out fliers" generated a flurry of e-mail and phone calls denouncing censorship by the University. The President urged Michael Jackson's Office of Student Affairs to respond to these accusations, and also looked into what actually happened. No one was sparred criticism, except the DT and the story, which omitted important contradictory allegations, such as that the student may have been blocking a doorway, shouting "obscenities" at the officers, and might have thrown fliers into the face of the two female officers, who then handcuffed him and led him away. It also failed to mention that the director of public safety was there, watched the entire incident, and after the student was led away, picked up the fliers and distributed them to interested students. Cynthia Cherry has invited comments on the University's Policy, and the most relevant page (97) of SCampus was passed out for faculty review and comment. There seems to be widespread misunderstanding of the USC policy in this area, as well as the specific event. The Executive Board will discuss any suggestions raised by faculty.
After months of discussion with Dean Campbell, Provost Armstrong and President Sample, the Executive Board is pleased to note that Dean Campbell is launching a 9-month strategic planning process for the university libraries. He will consult with the Senate to coordinate and ensure faculty input to this process. This should be a critical issue to the Senate over the coming year, and we should be proud that the Senate has helped raise the priority of this issue on the University's agenda.
Senate election ballots are due no later than 27 April.
At the last Senate meeting, Professor Moore distributed a court declaration of Professor Erwin Chemerinsky, claiming that USC's grievance process was a sham. This is posted on the MFA website. Several faculty questioned the Senate President about the purpose for and implications of this declaration, and also challenged the fairness of distributing only one of at least two declarations on this topic. Therefore, President Dutton distributed Professor David Slawson's declaration, also posted on the MFA website, which counters the claims made by Professor Chemerinsky. Please read both before you draw your own conclusions.
Report on Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Policy Process: Review of The Keck School of Medicine's Process. (Agenda item #3)
President Dutton presented a report on the process for unit's adopting a non-tenure-track policy, which argued that the Keck School, Senate Executive Board and Provost acted in accordance with the Faculty Handbook in approving the Keck School's new policy last summer. The report was issued in response to Senator and Medical Faculty Assembly President Kaslow concerns that the process, as outlined in the Faculty Handbook, had not been followed, before the Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Policy for the Keck School of Medicine went to the Provost for his eventual approval. This matter was raised for information only, no action was requested.
President Dutton noted that some have questioned whether the proper procedures were followed. He outlined the various steps that were taken before the policy reached the Senate Executive Board in July 2000. He noted that the MFA had not voted on the policy; however, the policy had been endorsed by Keck School's of Medicine Appointments, Promotion and Tenure Committee. The Executive Board is charged with determining if an appropriate faculty committee is consulted, and the appropriate committee cannot be read as limited to the elected faculty council, given the full text of Section 3.7. It was the judgement of two consecutive Executive Boards that this consultation satisfied the need to have the policy reviewed by an appropriate faculty committee, as outlined in the Faculty Handbook and specific Senate resolutions. In short, President Dutton argued that proper procedures had been followed and there had been no violation of the Faculty Handbook regarding the process. (President Dutton's report is attached).
Professor Kaslow, President of the Medical Faculty Assembly (MFA) then spoke. He stated that in some respects the report did not accurately reflect his statements or events at the MFA. Professor Kaslow stated that he would not address these inaccuracies at this time because they were not the key issue, which is that the process described in the first paragraph of Section 3.7 of the Faculty Handbook, which states that non-tenure-track faculty policies are to be formulated with the concurrence of the Dean and the tenured and tenure-track faculty acting through the elected faculty council or by the entire tenure and tenure-track faculty in smaller units, had not been followed. Professor Kaslow expressed his concern that if rules in the handbook are not followed in the medical school, then it may come to pass that they will not be followed in the other schools. Professor Kaslow's letter to the Senate and to President Dutton regarding this matter was distributed at the meeting (attached).
Provost Armstrong addressed questions by the Senators
Senate President Dutton invited Senators and guests to address the Provost with any questions they might have on their mind. The first question was whether the University had planned to deal with possible rolling electrical blackouts this summer. The Provost said he did not know the plan, but hoped it would not be a problem since the University gets its electric power from the City of Los Angeles. The second question related to the steps being taken to find a new Director of Enrollment. The Provost said that Michael Jackson has stepped in as acting Director of Enrollment and a search as begun for a permanent Director. Third, there was a question about why $5.2 million is being spent on landscaping around the Doheny Library when that money could be spent on improving the operations of the library. The Provost stated that a donor earmarked those funds for that specific purpose. Further, he stated that appearance and quality of the campus is of great importance to students, their families, alumni, trustees, and donors.
Tenure Clock Extension: Resolution 00/01-07 (Agenda item #4)
This resolution was approved by the Senate (yea=12, nay=10, abstaining=1) following a lengthy discussion.
Professor Timur Kuran, Chair of the Senate Tenure Clock Taskforce, stated the major principle was choice: choice for the faculty within individual schools to set the clock for their own school. He noted that the Task Force's report recommends a revision of the Faculty Handbook that will permit individual schools to extend a tenure clock from the current maximum of 7 years up to a maximum of 12 years. The tenure clock extension will require a secret vote of the faculty within the school before it can take effect. In some disciplines it takes longer for a researcher to get established and for some schools there is a need to set their tenure clock to match those universities with which they compete for faculty.
Senators and guests from the Business and Medical Schools spoke in favor of the resolution noting that the current limit of seven years is too short. Others speaking in favor of the resolution mentioned the faculty of individual schools are in the best position to make decisions about the length of the tenure clock for their school, so they should have that flexibility. It was mentioned that many other prestigious universities have longer tenure clocks for many of their schools. Those speaking against the resolution mentioned that perhaps the unqualified faculty would benefit most from this policy. That this policy might put pressure on other schools to adopt a longer tenure clock. The maximum of 12 years is just felt to be too long. Others questioned why the schools of medicine and business couldn't just make tenure decisions within the current time frame.
Personal Conflict of Interest: Resolution 00/01-08 (Agenda item #5)
This resolution was discussed at length, with a few Senators speaking against the change but most favoring the resolution. When a vote was about to be taken, a quorum was questioned. It was determined that a quorum was not present (only 19 voting members remaining) thus, no vote was taken. The resolution is to be carried over to the next Senate meeting.
Dismissal Language: Resolution 00/01-09 (Agenda item #6)
Despite the a lack of a quorum, this item was discussed at length, with concern focusing on provisions for ensuring that faculty assignments were not capricious. Voting on this resolution is to be carried over to the next Senate meeting, with a recommendation that this be placed at the top of the agenda.
New Business (Agenda item #7)
No new items were discussed
Resolution: 00/01-07: Tenure Clock Policy
WHEREAS, the Academic Senate, on 19 April 2000, voted (8-7) to endorse Resolution 99/00-05, recommending an extension of the probationary period for its faculty to a maximum of 10 years;
WHEREAS, this recommendation has been refined by a joint Provost-Senate Task Force on Extension of the Tenure Clock, which unanimously recommended an option for units to propose an extension of the tenure clock for faculty within their school to a maximum probationary period of 12 years, provided the school maintains a 6th year or earlier up or out review process and abides by university standards of excellence for promotion and tenure;
WHEREAS, the faculty of a given unit are most knowledgeable about the optimal tenure clock in their discipline or field;
WHEREAS, one or more units believe that an extension is critical to the recruitment and retention of top faculty who may choose other institutions with longer tenure clocks;
WHEREAS, no unit would be required to change their tenure clock, nor any unit have an extension of their tenure clock imposed without a secret vote of their own tenured and non-tenured tenure track faculty in favor of the change;
WHEREAS, the Office of the Provost and the Executive Board of the Senate would review any specific school's proposal for an extension to ensure its compliance with the principles laid out by the Task Force and the maintenance of high standards;
WHEREAS, this revised policy introduces more choice and flexibility for schools, while maintaining a university standard as a maximum, which has been USC practice;
BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Senate endorses the principles embodied in the Task Force recommendations, as described in the attached report and available on the Web:
http://www.usc.edu/academe/acsen/issues/tenure_clock/
FURTHERMORE, these recommendations should be reviewed jointly by the Office of the Provost and the Handbook Committee for incorporation in the Faculty Handbook at the earliest possible date.
Handouts at the Meeting:
1. Invitation to attend the Senate Recognition dinner on Wednesday May 9, 2001
2. Copy of a court declaration of Professor W. David Slawson
3. Copy of University Policy on Free Expression and Dissent
4. Copy of an open letter to the University Community by Michael Jackson, Vice President for Student Affairs
5. Emeriti Center Brochure
6. A report by President Dutton to the Senate on Non-Tenure-Track Policy Process
7. Copy of Academic Resolution 96/97-17: School Policy on Appointment and Promotion of Non-Tenure Track Faculty: Faculty Input
8. Keck School of Medicine Procedures for Non-Tenure-Track Faculty Appointment, Promotions, Reappointment, Non-reappointment and Mid-contract Termination.
9. April 16, 2001 letter to the Senate by Professor Kaslow
10. Copy of April 16, 2001 letter to Senate President Dutton by Professor Kaslow
11. Response to comments of the Tenure Clock Task Force report of January 2001
Respectfully Submitted,
Jerry D. Gates, Ph.D.
Secretary General of the Academic Senate