Academic Senate Meeting

May 12, 2004

Minutes

Present: M. Afifi, M. Apostolos, J. Brown, R. Cole, P. Conti, D. Cruz (alternate for E. Garrett), C. Fogu, R. Garet, J. Glueckert, N. Hanel, E. Heikkila, E. Hollins, N. Hollyn, P. Levine, W. Mack, E. McCann, S. Montgomery, J. Moore, M. Nichol, R. Nishimoto, G. Painter, P. Pattengale, M. Safonov, G. Schierle, K. Shing, P. Shrivastava, P. Starr, P. Vorderer, J. Walsh, W. Waugaman (alternate for R. Zemke), M. Weinstein, D. Wilson, W. Wolf (alternate for D. Ann), B. Wood

Absent: C. Betts, G. Davison, R. Nishimoto, J. Nyquist, D. Stram, W. Weber

Guests: L. Armstrong, M. Ewalt, S. Gupta, L. Kedes, B. Kosko, M. Levine, T. O’Malia, L. Pryor. S. Yvellez

Actions:

1. April meeting minutes were approved, with changes

2. Resolution 03/04-10 was passed

3. Resolution 03/04-09 was passed

4. Resolution 03/04-11 was passed

5. Resolution 03/04-12 was passed

6. Resolution 03/04-13 was passed

7. A motion to obtain additional tickets for University events for faculty use was passed

1. Mini-Retreat Notes

President McCann called the meeting to order on 1:10p.m. He outlined the activities of the afternoon, with a specific mention of the mini-retreat work in the first part of the meeting.

He then introduced Academic Vice-President Garet who discussed the importance of building an agenda for the Senate for the 04/05 year. Several of the issues that were introduced were committee organization, academic integrity and corporate-sponsored research, service learning in relation to the classroom, and other roles for the Senate in relation to the draft strategic vision. Vice-President Garet encouraged the Senate to raise issues in these areas that should be considered as the agenda is developed. Senators were also encouraged to identify individuals that may provide important perspective for each topic.

The importance of academic integrity in research is clearly an important issue that cuts across the University and demands attention. There are a number of issues related to this topic for which the Senate may be able to provide constructive dialog.

The issue of grade inflation was raised as an area that may be worth pursuing. It was noted that the Marshall School of Business has an assigned mean for each class. The relationship between grades and teaching evaluations was noted as deserving of study. Concern was expressed that the problem of grade inflation applies to graduate education as well as undergraduate. It would be worthwhile to discuss the role of the Center for Excellence in Teaching in the evaluation process. After last summer’s retreat, representatives from LAS agreed to work on this issue, contingent on the availability of resource support. Unfortunately, the resources were not forthcoming, although the LAS faculty has continued to work on this issue. The faculty evaluation system deserves consideration as well, since the incentives in annual reviews may encourage potential gaming and conflicts of interest.

The Senate has an opportunity to add action steps to the University’s draft Strategic Plan that may ground the broad outlines of the plan with explicit activities. The Senate was encouraged to consider how this organization may be able to contribute such approaches. In contrast, some criticism of the strategic plan as a utilitarian document rather than a principle-based plan was offered. One of the areas that demands additional work is the nature of the inter-disciplinary work called for in the plan, and the methods through which faculty activity will be encouraged and evaluated. It was mentioned that the historical distinctions drawn in the strategic plan may be convenient but artificial. The faculty may be able to add perspective on whether the historical issues in fact demand a significant re-structuring of effort. It was noted that the result of previous plans devolved into a two-class system, with some faculty being able to obtain Provost funding because their efforts were within the strategic interests, and others excluded because their fields simply weren’t amenable to the categories.

Administrative Vice-President Heikkila introduced the importance of reviewing the committee structure of the Senate, and the coordination with University administration. Several key functions were noted, including the administrative activities that demand faculty involvement, the implementation of strategic planning, and the university as a local neighbor or community participant. The focus should be to have fewer committees, but to have them empowered in critical areas. It was noted that there is considerable overlap on committees that may be appointed by the Provost’s office, by the Academic Senate, and in combination.

Provost Armstrong mentioned that the University Strategic Plan now calls for building flexibility and risk into the activities of the organization. Faculty should be key participants in identifying institutional obstacles and developing methods to facilitate their elimination or revision. It would be useful for faculty to identify how to revise the committee structure to facilitate rather than impede progress in various institutional activities. Faculty can be useful participants in the development of relationships with external groups like government and corporations, as well as in the consideration of conflict of interest and commitment that may arise in these collaborations. A core value of the University and the strategic plan is free inquiry, which may be affected by conflicts in relationships.

The Strategic Plan is intended to provide an atmosphere for organizational advancement. The next year will be focused on creating action plans to clarify opportunities for faculty, departments, and schools. The present version of the plan has been restructured and will be disseminated electronically.

The Senate expressed concern that the plan did not make explicit findings regarding future priorities. Provost Armstrong said that the most important component of the plan for him was the need to become a university of real societal impact. USC faculty can articulate the way that society is evolving and may provide solutions for identified societal problems. Implied within this emphasis is the recognition of an increasingly global nature of society.

Comments were made regarding the potential misuse of the strategic plan. Specifically, more attention should be paid to the traditions of the University as a center for free and basic inquiry. Further, the integration of teaching and research demands additional attention.

The mini-retreat was declared closed at 2:30 p.m.

May Meeting of the Academic Senate

The regular meeting of the Academic Senate was called to order at 2:45p.m. President McCann indicated that this section of the meeting would include voting on several resolutions.

2. Approval of April minutes

Approval of the April meeting minutes were moved and seconded. It was noted that line 149 should be changed from ‘emails’ to ‘letters,’ and that reference to Professor Levine should be changed to ‘Vice-Provost.’ The minutes were approved unanimously, with the specified changes.

3. Announcements

President McCann updated the Senate on the election of officers for the 04/05 year. Senators should have received the slate of nominees and voting will continue until May 17th, and the results will be announced shortly after the completion of the tally on May 18th.

Senate committee reports presently available were distributed to the Senate. Reports submitted after the May meeting will be posted on the Senate web site. President McCann announced that Professor Brian Henderson, Preventive Medicine, has been appointed Dean of the Keck School of Medicine.

4. Distinguished Service Awards and Recognition of President McCann

Administrative Vice-President Heikkila was introduced to announce the Distinguished Faculty Service Award Recipients. The Task Force was impressed with the wide variety and number of nominees for the awards, and found it difficult to narrow the selections. The Awards Committee provided the following description of the awardees:

Laurence Kedes – Professor Laurence Kedes’ work at USC has led to two great accomplishments. One, the scientific advancement of the field of Genetic Medicine and two, the involvement of community outside USC to inspire young students to explore medical research. He accomplished the second by using unusual combinations of Science and the Arts. Laurence created a unique environment with an art gallery in his laboratories and invited various community groups to educate individuals of all ages about the adventures and benefits of scientific, medical research.

Philippa Levine – During Professor Philippa Levine’s three-year tenure as an officer of the Academic Senate, and most especially during her term as President of the Faculty in 2002-2003, Philippa has stood unwavering in her commitment to academic integrity, freedom of scholarly inquiry, and the institution of tenure.  Over this period, Philippa has also played crucial roles on the University Committee on Academic Review, on a subcommittee of the Provost’s Strategic Planning Committee, and on the Board of Trustees’ Academic Affairs Committee.  It is testimony to her prodigious skills that she was able to maintain the highest standards of scholarly research, publication, and teaching alongside her extensive service contributions.

Michael Nichol – Professor Michael Nichol personifies dedicated and effective faculty service. His skillful stewardship in recent years of the Environment Committee and, more recently, of the Research Committee has been crucial to the accomplishments of both. He is a model of a well informed, thoughtful faculty colleague who is ever ready to listen to and absorb different points of view while never losing sight of the important issues. During the past two years, in addition to his other service, research, administrative, and teaching duties, Mike has also served as Secretary General of the Academic Senate, a position that demands a great deal of personal sacrifice and sound judgment. As a leading member of the Academic Senate’s Executive Board he contributes consistently and constructively on a wide range of issues.

Vice-President Garet provided testimony to the leadership of President McCann. Particular mention of his humor, his hopefulness, and his devotion to the activities of the Senate was emphasized. President McCann has provided key leadership during the strategic planning process, and has made special effort to assure participation of the Senate in that activity. The Senate presented President McCann with a medal signifying appreciation for his longstanding service and commitment.

5. Conflict of Interest in Research: Policy and Procedure

President McCann introduced the discussion of the Conflict of Interest Policy Resolution. Secretary Nichol, chair of the Research Committee, explained that this matter had been referred to the Research Committee in order to facilitate a revision to the present policy. The recommendation before the Senate reflected materials developed in conjunction with an ad-hoc subcommittee of the Research Committee, the full Research Committee, and the Executive Board. Resolution 03/04-10 was forwarded to the Senate with the concurrence of the Research Committee.

The changes offered in the policy include limiting ‘close relation’ to an individual’s spouse and children, and providing a specific ‘trigger’ of potential conflicts when an investigator has salary from or equity interest in a sponsoring organization of $10,000 in the previous year. The proposed revision also seeks to clarify examples of activities that might be excepted and those that are likely to meet definitions of conflict of interest. It was noted that Resolution 03/04-10 asks the Senate to adopt the revision in principle, as it will require additional revision in collaboration with the Office of Compliance. Professor Nichol was asked to provide a summary of the policy for distribution to faculty to encourage their interest in the topic. Resolution 03/04-10 was passed unanimously.

6. Courseware Policy

President McCann introduced Resolution 03/04-9 proposed by the Executive Board. Professors Wood and O’Malia, chairs of the Distance Education Distance Learning Committee (DEDL) were introduced to discuss the Courseware Resolution. The chairs reiterated the changes that were raised in discussions at the April Senate meeting. It was commented that the policy rests on the definition of ‘minimal use’ and line 57 should be revised to ‘as illustrated in section 2 above’. It was asked whether the faculty member owns the syllabus. It was indicated that the faculty member owns the syllabus according to this draft of the policy. It was noted that the proposed policy is unusual in academia as it provides for faculty ownership of courseware.

In contrast, concern was expressed that the proposed policy, while shorter, was little different from the policy that was defeated unanimously last year. It was argued that the policy should be rejected for two main reasons. First, the policy doesn’t define what is or is not intellectual property; and second, it is in conflict with the principles of intellectual property. It is not possible to revise the policy to be consistent with academic freedom and the principles of intellectual property, however, there are several key sections that demand revision. In response, Professor Wood indicated that it appeared that the recommendations of the DEDL were consistent with the principles of academic freedom and intellectual property. It was further noted by Professor O’Malia that the new policy provides for a procedure and a prior agreement between the faculty member and the respective dean of the school. Resolution 03/04-9 was passed with 16 votes in favor, 3 opposed, and 5 abstaining.

7. Reorganization of the Faculty Handbook per the recommendations of the 02/03 Handbook Committee

Three resolutions regarding revisions to the Faculty Handbook were introduced by President McCann. The first resolution 03/04-11 calls for a reorganization of the handbook, according to the recommendations of the 02/03 Faculty Handbook Committee. This resolution specifies that the content of the Handbook would not be affected. President McCann recommended the resolution because the revision would improve the transparency of the Handbook. Professor Cruz, the chair of the 03/04 Faculty Handbook, endorsed the change in organization as well. A friendly amendment was offered: “In the event that unintended changes in the current text create a substantive change in meaning, the meaning of the language appearing in the 2001 handbook shall apply.” Resolution 03/04-11 was passed unanimously.

8. Re-design of the Faculty Handbook per the recommendations of the 02/03 Handbook Committee

Resolution 03/04-12 was introduced to make various editorial changes to the Faculty Handbook, according to the recommendations of the 02/03 Faculty Handbook Committee. The motion was passed unanimously.

9. Re-design of the Faculty Handbook per the recommendations of the 03/04 Handbook Committee

Resolution 03/04-13 was introduced to make several editorial changes to the Faculty Handbook, according to the recommendations of the 03/04 Faculty Handbook Committee. The motion was passed unanimously.

10. Event Ticket Policy

Professor Hanel, chair of the University Events and Tickets Committee, was introduced to discuss ticketing policies. She noted that this body adopted a policy last year that twenty tickets per Spectrum event be made available for faculty use. This year, at least one event was extremely popular, and a significant number of faculty were not able to obtain tickets for the event. Further, some faculty complained that they were unable to obtain tickets for the 2004 Rose Bowl. It was moved by Weinstein, seconded by Pattengale that the Senate request that Spectrum make available 50 tickets until one week prior to the event. The motion was passed unanimously.

11. Copyright Clearance and Course Readers

Mr. Ewalt and Mr. Yvellez, Manager, Custom Publishing, University Bookstore, were introduced to discuss course readers and the need for copyright authorization for material. Information was provided regarding present copyright constraints. For example, articles published prior to 1923, and most government works, are considered acceptable for fair use and are not subject to copyright. Materials that are not subject to fair use include textbook and workbook material. Anything that is used in class should be brief (e.g., short portions of textbooks). It was noted that faculty who use external sources for development and distribution of course readers are liable for copyright violation if it has not been obtained by the distributor.

12. Authorship in the Digital Age

President McCann closed the last meeting of the academic year with discussion of the planning of a forum to explore authorship and intellectual property in the digital age. This panel should be conducted in the Spring ’05 semester. The focus of the session will be on how authorship has changed and how recent legal changes have affected intellectual property.

President McCann thanked the Senate for their excellent service during the year, and expressed his appreciation for their assistance during his tenure. The meeting was adjourned at 4:55 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,

Mike Nichol, Ph.D.

Secretary General of the Academic Senate