Academic Senate
Minutes of the September 15, 1999 Meeting

Present: A. Crigler, G. Davis, M. Dudziak, F. Feldman, T. Habinek, N. Hanel, V. Henderson, A. Hendrick, C. Julienne, M. Kann, H. Kaslow, D. Kempler, M. Kinder, R. Koda, B. Kosko, J. Kunc, R. Labaree, T. Levi, S. Lund, N. Lutkehaus, A. Mircheff, J. Nyquist, D. O' Leary, N. Petasis, A. Pope, M. Safonov, G. Salem, G. Schierle, M. Schuetze-Coburn, H. Schor, N. Stromquist, W. Thalmann, W. Tierney, J. Vega, M. Weinstein, J. Zernik

Absent: J. Armour, W. Dehning, J. Gates, P. Heseltine, B. Jansson, B. Knight, L. Laine, M. Mazon, P. Nosco, W. Petak, K. Price

Guests: F. Clark, W. Dutton, M. Levine, H. Slucki, J. Zernik

President William Tierney called the meeting to order at 2:50 p.m..

President Tierney welcomed all Senators and guests and introduced the members of the 1999-2000 Academic Senate Executive Board:

William G. Thalmann (Professor of Classics, L.A.S.), Immediate Past President Ann Crigler (Associate Professor of Political Science, L.A.S.), Administrative Vice President Nicos A. Petasis (Professor of Chemistry, L.A.S.), Secretary General Jody Armour (Professor of Law), Member-at-Large Victor Henderson (Professor of Neurology, Gerontology and Psychology), Member-at-Large Austin Mircheff (Professor of Medicine), Member-at-Large Hilary Schor (Associate Professor of English, L.A.S.), Member-at-Large

Agenda Item #1: Approval of Minutes

The minutes of April 21, 1999 meeting were approved unanimously. The minutes of the May 12, 1999 meeting were approved with one amendment. The second to the last sentence in item #5 was changed (in italics) to read: ÒIt was also noted that in some units, such as the Medical School, faculty may not be consulted at all in the selection of chairs, whether by elections or by other means, and a process for doing so needs to be instituted.Ó

Agenda Item #2: Special election for Academic Vice-President

President Tierney informed the Senate that Professor Gregory Davis has resigned from the position of Academic Vice President and therefore a special election has to be held according to the Academic Senate By-Laws. Professor Davis who was present at the meeting, explained that he resigned because he would not be able to fulfil the duties of the future President of the Academic Senate since he will be out of the country. President Tierney then announced that a nominating committee consisting of Professor A. Crigler, Chair of Committee on Committees, Immediate Past President William Thalmann and himself, met several times over the summer and came up with two candidates for this position: Florence Clark (Professor, Occupational Therapy, Independent Health Professions) and William Dutton (Professor, Annenberg School for Communication). The nominations were then presented and approved by the Executive Board. President Tierney introduced the two candidates to the Senate and announced that the Ballot will be mailed to Senate voting members on September 20th and is due back to the Senate office by noon on October 8th. The results of the election will be announced at the October 21st meeting.

Agenda Item#3: Provost's comments [Vice-Provost Levine].

President Tierney pointed out that he meets regularly with the Provost and that the Senate Executive Board meets with him once a month. He then announced that Provost Armstrong was not able to attend the Academic Senate meeting because he is attending a meeting of the Board of Trustees. He then welcomed Vice Provost M. Levine, Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs and also a past President of the Senate, who made remarks on behalf of the Provost for the following issues:

(a) Faculty governance: Vice Provost Levine began his remarks by pointing out that the Academic Senate and the various Committees should attract faculty leaders and that we should encourage some of our leading faculty members to get involved in all aspects of faculty governance. He then commented on the Senate retreat that was held at the Descanso Gardens on August 27. Referring to the white papers presented at the retreat, Vice Provost Levine said that they were nicely done and that the issues raised will be studied during the coming year.

(b) Senate Resolutions on the Faculty Handbook: He commented on the status of three resolutions for changes in the Faculty Handbook that were previously endorsed by the Senate. The first one deals with a new paragraph regarding the principles of putting together a dossier for promotion and tenure and the second involves an updated information for Section 4 that deals with Faculty/Student Relations, which was obsolete by the time the Handbook was approved. He then said that both of these changes were reviewed by the Provost's Council and were submitted to the President for approval. A third resolution that would require that all Department Chairs are elected, which was endorsed by the Senate at the May meeting, was not accepted by the Provost, who explained his reasons in a letter to the President of the Senate.

(c) Faculty and Chair review: Regarding the pending issue of Faculty and Chair evaluations Vice Provost Levine said that in early Fall the Faculty Councils together with the Deans will work out the details of the new policy for each School.

(d) Retirement policy: Following the work of the Senate Task Force on the subject, a new retirement policy is currently being reviewed. The Benefits Committee will soon take-up this issue and the Academic Senate will bring it up for discussion later in the Fall.

(e) Interdisciplinary research and teaching: He emphasized that this issue has a great potential and is part of the Strategic Plan and he pointed out that the faculty, across Schools and disciplines, should determine what makes sense in each case.

(f) Distributed and distance learning: A presidential commission was set-up last year to examine this issue for the university as a whole. Vice Provost Levine defined Distance Learning as the offering of educational opportunities for students that are not on campus, including particular Degree programs via the internet. A number of universities around the world (e.g. Stanford, Oxford) are already establishing or considering such programs. Distributed Learning on the other hand is the offering of educational materials for students on campus, including web-based courses, studying materials, discussion groups, access to the instructors, etc. At USC a number of Schools (e.g. Engineering, Gerontology, etc) have been involved for some time with distributed as well as distance learning and a number of classrooms have been equipped appropriately. Although further developments should be anticipated, each School has to determine what is appropriate in each case.

Vice Provost Levine then entertained questions from senators. In response to a question regarding the reconfiguration of the tuition remission policy he replied that the Benefits Committee is considering revising the current policy which is mostly limited to tuition for eligible children admitted to USC. Although there is a list of colleges with tuition exchange posibilities, this list is not broad enough. He pointed out that the increasing standards of admission at USC have resulted in an increasing number of long serving employees that are unable to take advantage of this benefit. One option being considered is to provide a flat amount of tuition remission, calculated on a revenue neutral basis, that can be used at any college or university. If such a system is adopted it would be phased in, with the current employees having the option of the new or the old system. This issue will be discussed during the coming year and will probably be considered for implementation next year. A senator pointed out that this new system would mean that the total amount of tuition remission for USC admitted students would be a lot less than the full tuition. In response to a senator's comment, Vice Provost Levine said that USC should try to attract any new bright students, and should not be limited to the children of faculty or other employees. In addition, scholarships can also be used for this purpose. Another senator pointed out that currently the tuition remission pool is probably relatively smaller than it could be, since fewer employees have eligible (USC admitted) children. If this pool is used to calculate the new tuition benefit, the amount will be artificially smaller. President Tierney said that this is an issue that needs further discussion and that he may invite Vice President Dougherty during the spring to report to the senate on this issue.

A senator asked Vice Provost Levine to comment on the evaluation of administrators. He pointed out that a previous senate resolution has suggested that faculty should vote on the reappointment of Deans and wondered if faculty should also evaluate the Provost or the President. Vice Provost Levine replied that the Provost is evaluated by the President and that the President is evaluated by the Board of Trustees. Although faculty can have input and feedback they are not involved in the election of the Provost or the President who serve at the pleasure of the Trustees. Regarding the reappointment of Deans, he said that the Provost consults with the faculty prior to reappointing a Dean. However, he said anonymous questionnaires and simple votes are not sufficient since they do not give adequate information needed for the Dean's evaluation. On the other hand, the Faculty Councils can play a more substantive role in this process. In response to another related question, Vice Provost Levine said that different Schools could vary in the system used for Dean's evaluation. Past President Thalmann commented that the recent Task Force on administrators review did not propose any changes in the reviews of the Deans.

Agenda Item#4. Senate President's comments: Framework for the year

President Tierney informed the Senate that two units, the Annenberg School for Communication and the Marshall School of Business have not yet elected their representative(s). Professor Mark Weinstein said that he is one of the senators from the Marshal School of Business. Professor Titus Levi from the Annenberg School attended the meeting but he is not the elected Senate representative. The Senators' list was included in the Agenda packet.

President Tierney informed the members that a new Committee on Committees was created, chaired by Professor Ann Crigler, the Administrative Vice President. The committee's charge is to recommend names for appointment to the various Senate committees. Professor Crigler then invited interested members to nominate themselves or others to any of the Senate standing committees.

President Tierney made a number of comments regarding the operation of the Senate in the new year. He said that to the extend possible any new issue that comes up will be first discussed with the Executive Board and then forwarded to the appropriate committee for comment. If the Executive Board then approves these issues for the agenda, they will be brought to the Senate. The purpose for this process is not to delay the issues, but rather to give an opportunity for a more informed presentation to the Senate.

President Tierney then emphasized the need for proper communication with senators and the Executive Board. He said that if a senator sends a letter to the President or the Board of Trustees referring to the Senate or making a suggestion regarding an issue that the Senate can consider, it should first be brought to the Executive Board for consideration. As an example, he referred to a senator sending a letter to the administration with specific suggestions on how to make an improvement (e.g. to the Zumberge Fund) that does not take into account all aspects of the issue. Ultimately, this may complicate efforts by the Senate to take on the same issue. On the other hand, he said that faculty members are of course free to communicate with anyone as individuals. However, only the senate can represent the faculty as a whole. At minimum, he said, the Senate should be informed. In response to President Tierney's comments on this matter, a senator raised a concern that this may have a chilling effect on faculty ideas and it would be difficult to enforce. President Tierney replied that he is just making a plea and not suggesting any new rules. Another senator said that further dissemination of information regarding the ongoing activities of the Senate would be helpful to prevent such actions. It was also mentioned that according to the Senate By-Laws only the President of the Senate and the Executive Board can sign letters on behalf of the Senate.

A new senator asked President Tierney how is the Executive Board elected. He replied that a nominating committee puts together a list of candidates and an election is held during April. The same senator wondered why there is no representative from the School of Engineering. President Tierney said that three faculty from Engineering were contacted last year but did not accept.

After pointing out that it is quite difficult and time consuming to gather data from various comparative institutions, President Tierney handed out a list of seven universities that the Senate should refer to for comparative data. These comparative institutions are: Stanford University, UCLA, University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, University of Chicago, MIT and New York University. Although he said that he would not object to adding any other university to this list, the list should not have more than seven institutions.

Regarding the Senate web site President Tierney said that Robert Labaree is working on it and it should be up by the next meeting. Any suggestions on how to improve the site are welcomed. He said that the new web site, in addition to the archives of the Senate, will also have other helpful information to faculty. He also that the Forum Newsletter will be issued more often and will have enhanced content.

Agenda Item #5. Special meetings of Senate

In addition to the regular meetings of the Senate that take place once a month, President Tierney announced that there will be three voluntary Friday meetings during the Fall semester. These meetings will be open to senators only and will focus discussions on a specific issue. The first meeting will be on October 15 and will focus on faculty governance and general education. President Tierney encouraged all senators to attend and said that this will be tried out during the Fall and if it works out they may also be continued in the Spring.

Agenda Item #6: Status of recent resolutions

President Tierney said that the two resolutions that were passed by the Senate in the Spring regarding amendments to the Faculty Handbook involving the Dossier and Student Relations, were approved by the Provost and are pending approval by the President. However, a third proposed change, requiring all Department Chairs to be elected was not approved by the Provost. Before bringing up this issue again for consideration by the Senate, President Tierney said that he has sent a letter to all Faculty Councils asking for their comments by October 8.

Referring to a handout on Leadership Development Workshops given to the senators, President Tierney said that one of the issues that will be pursued this year is faculty development. At first there will be a focus on training of Department Chairs. Later, it will move on to the training of Assistant Professors. The issue of minority and women faculty will also be taken on.

Agenda Item #7: Specific charges to committees