Academic Senate
Minutes of the October 21, 1998 Meeting

Present: J.L. Anderson, M. Bolger, A. Crigler, D. Crockett, F. Feldman (alternate for J. Russell), J. Gates, R. Guralnick, S. Hamm-Alvarez, V. Henderson, P. Heseltine, H. Kaslow, B. Kosko, R. Labaree, D. Leary, F. Mason (alternate for M. Zeichner-David), A. Mircheff, J. Nyquist, N. Petasis, D. Polan, G. Schierle, H. Slucki (alternate for G. Albrecht), P. Starr, N. Stromquist, C. Synolakis, W. Thalmann, W. Tierney, L. Wegner, R. Zimmer

Absent: E. Accampo, M. Apostolos, W. Baer, H. Cheeseman, T. Gustafson, B. Jansson, R. Jelliffe, M. Kann, K. Price, H. Schor, C. Silva-Corvalan, M. Weinstein, K. Wilber

Guests: L. Armstrong, N. Hanel, M. Levine, A. Levine, S. Pratt, E. Schockman, C. Sullivan

The meeting was called to order at 2:45 p.m. by President W. Thalmann.

Agenda Item #1: Announcements/Approval of Minutes

President Thalmann made the following announcements:

a.The first in the Academic Senate lecture series by Professor George Lakoff was a great success. Another lecture is planned for Spring 1999 and Senate members are invited to submit names of potential speakers.

b.Professor Marshall Cohen, who was recently named a Distinguished Professor and had previously served as Dean of Humanities, has agreed to serve as the new Faculty Mediation Officer.

c.The two reports on the "Review of Deans and Chair" and on the "Review of Faculty," that were drafted by two sub-committees appointed by the Provost, are now published in the Senate Web page (http://www.usc.edu/dept/acsen/whitepapers.html). Any comments on these reports by the faculty should be forwarded to President Thalmann.

d.There was no luck in finding a more appropriate location for the meetings of the Senate, as was discussed at the September meeting. Some possible meeting locations have already been booked for other events, while the cost of rearranging the tables and chairs in the main dining room of the Faculty Center (the current meeting place) is prohibitively expensive. Therefore, the Senate meetings will continue to be held as usual, while a new location will be sought for the Spring 1999 meetings.

e.At the request of President Thalmann, Vice Provost Levine informed the Senate that a faculty contract will be issued to faculty members of the School of Medicine in a matter of weeks, although he could not give a specific date of when they will be issued. Following a correction to the list of Senators present at the meeting, the Minutes of the September 1998 Senate meeting were approved with all in favor except of one abstention.

Agenda Item #2. Election of Nominating Committee Members

President Thalmann invited nominations for Members of the Nominating Committee. Only the following four Senators were nominated: Robert Guralnick, Peter Heseltine, Peter Starr, and Lucy Wegner. These Senators were then elected to fill the four vacancies on the Nominating Committee.

Agenda Item #3. Approval of Victor Henderson's appointment as Administrative Vice President

President Thalmann mentioned that Professor Silvia Formenti has taken a sabbatical leave and therefore she resigned from the Senate Executive Board, where she was serving as Administrative Vice President. He also indicated that according to Senate By-law #15 "In the event that an executive officer other than the President or Academic Vice President, or when an Executive Board Member at Large resigns or becomes unable or ineligible to serve, and there is less than one year remaining to serve in the term, the Executive Board shall designate a replacement whose appointment must be submitted for approval by the Academic Senate at its next meeting." In accordance with this By-Law, the Executive Board has appointed Professor Victor Henderson from the Department of Neurology to serve as the new Administrative Vice President for the remainder of the current term. Following a brief introduction of Dr. Henderson's background by President Thalmann, the Senate unanimously approved his appointment. Although at the time of voting Dr. Henderson was not present, when he later arrived President Thalmann introduced him to Senate members who warmly welcomed him.

Agenda Item #4. Provost's Remarks.

President Thalmann welcomed Provost Armstrong who addressed the Senate regarding four issues:

(a) The Provost mentioned that after a number of modifications and changes, the review of the University's Strategic Plan was recently approved by the Trustees. The final document is available on the web at: http://www.usc.edu/admin/provost/strategicplan. This plan outlines four "Critical Pathways" in the areas of Life Sciences, Communication, Arts and The Urban Paradigm. Although these areas were not clearly defined in this plan, the Provost indicated that they must be defined soon. For this purpose, he mentioned that beginning in early November, a number of luncheons will be organized, with about 25 faculty from different areas who will try to develop a consensus on how to proceed. The Provost explained that we must identify areas of potential leadership role, especially areas where USC has unique opportunities, and then identify resources that can help establish excellence in these areas.

(b) The Provost announced that Morton Schapiro, the Dean of Letters Arts and Sciences, was recently given a second appointment as Vice President for Planning. He explained that Dr. Schapiro is an economist with valued expertise in this area. He also mentioned that the Trustees have challenged the Administration to develop improved capital plans that better address the needs of the University at large. He indicated that the present system of Revenue Center Management does not always meet the actual needs of the Schools to improve buildings etc., and the Deans can address these issues only when they identify funds for this purpose. For this reason, he mentioned that the current system of Revenue Center Management is undergoing a review in this area.

(c) The Provost announced that nominations are being sought for new Distinguished Professors and for new University Professors.

(d) At the suggestion of Vice Provost Sullivan the Provost informed the Senate that the Draft Policy on Intellectual Property is currently being reviewed. He explained that it is important for the University to improve its policy in this area.

Provost Armstrong then entertained questions from the floor:

A Senator raised concern regarding the University Libraries and several collections in particular which are being removed or closed, such as the Asian collection and the School of Education Library. The Provost explained that some smaller libraries that were not used as much were closed out or consolidated. He indicated that these changes will facilitate a more efficient use of library space and will allow the remaining libraries to be open for longer hours. Also, in certain cases, some items are replaced with electronic access. He also explained that some rarely used items are moved to storage and an effort is being made to increase the number of items that will be made available electronically, although this is very expensive.

The Provost was asked to comment about an editorial in the journal Science regarding the organization of University Departments. He responded by saying that indeed many Departments were created in a historical sense and perhaps it is time to re-think their role and organization, something that is also encouraged by recent trends for interdisciplinary work. He noted, however, that USC's Revenue Center Management makes such re-organization even harder. He concluded by saying that although we should be thinking about this, we should not try to do it "ahead of the curve".

In response to a question regarding the entrepreneurial nature of the University and whether it should re-organize according to a "business model", the Provost said that the University receives pressures from several different "audiences" and it tries to respond to each one accordingly. As an example, he indicated that the Federal Government, which is the source for a large portion of the research funds to the University, often creates pressures to pursue some new research initiatives or to organize in certain new ways. On the other hand there are also pressures to organize the faculty in ways that are more academically appropriate. He concluded by saying that in order to respond to these pressures the University should get more faculty input.

The Provost was asked to explain what the University is planning to.do in order to improve the standings of undergraduate and graduate programs. He responded by saying that next September the University will begin a program review across the board, which will also involve the faculty. He also mentioned that the Graduate School is being completely reorganized. Furthermore, he indicated that the system of Revenue Center Management will be revised to free resources that will be used for new initiatives in various new directions, especially in areas that run across Schools and Departments. He mentioned that a number of such efforts are already going on in the College, especially in History, Biology and Economics.

A Senator pointed out to the Provost that the system of Revenue Center Management was mentioned several times in his remarks and asked if there were any thoughts of completely re-thinking the whole system, rather than simply modifying it which may lead to a number of unforeseen problems. The Provost said that, despite some disadvantages, especially regarding interdisciplinary programs, the system of Revenue Center Management has several positive features that make it attractive, including a de-centralization of the decision process and a greater flexibility by the Deans. He also noted that with this system the University does not run any deficits and that the Trustees strongly believe in it.

President Thalmann thanked the Provost for addressing the Senate.

Agenda Item #5. Resolution 98/99-02 "Re-establishment of a Teaching Innovation Fund"

President Thalmann gave a brief history of the Teaching Innovation Fund, which was established from the University Annual Operating Budget but was used to provide matching funds for the Hewlett Grant and has been phased out with the expiration of the grant. He pointed out that this Fund should be re-established and be funded on a continued basis, particularly in light of recent trends in developing new and interdisciplinary courses. He then introduced Resolution 98/99-02 and a discussion followed. It was suggested that this Fund should cover both Undergraduate and Graduate Courses. A number of Senators emphasized the need for a continued support for this Fund and that the University should be urged to find ways to do this.

A motion to approve the following amended version of the resolution was passed with 21 in favor, no opposed and one abstention:

Collaborative, interdisciplinary teaching is widely understood by the USC faculty and administration to enrich the education of students and the intellectual life of their teachers. opportunities for such teaching are also recognized as in need of development. In the Academic Senate white paper, "Reinventing Undergraduate Education at USC," it was noted that the University Teaching Innovation Fund, which provided summer support for the development of team-taught, interdisciplinary courses, has been abandoned.

Therefore, it is resolved that the Academic Senate urges the administration to reestablish CONTINUING SUPPORT FOR the University Teaching Innovation Fund, and that in the award of grants from this fund preference be given to proposals for collaboratively taught, interdisciplinary courses, IN BOTH THE UNDERGRADUATE AND THE GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL LEVELS. Guidelines for application and allocation of grants should be developed by a joint Senate/Provost Committee.

Agenda Item #6. Dossier Section of Handbook

President Thalmann explained that the version of the Handbook approved by the Senate has in the main text detailed instructions for putting together a dossier for promotion or tenure. In the 1987 Handbook this section was part of the Appendix and it has now moved to the main text for no apparent reason. President Thalmann argued that the Handbook should be limited only to what are the most essential items and instead of these detailed instructions, the Handbook should only contained a summary of what is needed. In this manner, the Handbook would not have to be amended in order to make small changes to the detailed instructions on how to set-up a dossier.

After a brief discussion on this matter, the Senate decided to table the issue for a later time.

Agenda Item #7. Academic Activities of Student Affairs

President Thalmann welcomed Dr. Eric Schockman, Associate Dean for Student Affairs. Dr. Schockman briefly presented three issues:

(a) An academic intervention program has been launched, which involves 160 faculty members in activities outside classrooms and in the residences.

(b) A grant has been received from the Hewlett Foundation which involves a collaboration between the divisions of Academic Affairs and Student Affairs. This program has sponsored the Summer Institute of Collaborative Learning, which put together an interdisciplinary group over a 6-7 day period to explore new ways for pluralistic classroom activities. A web site, as well as several white papers and workshops are also sponsored by the grant.

(c) A web-based "Gateway to USC", which includes a "Student Portfolio" has been established that will assist students in several ways. This system (see: http://www.usc.edu/dept/student-affairs/) is expected to allow students to: (i) acquire information on USC and where they fit-in, (ii) strategize on goals and develop discipline, (iii) record and reflect on their experiences, and (iv) develop a resume and get help in obtaining a job. A handout detailing the features and purpose of this project was distributed at the meeting.

President Thalmann thanked Mr. Schockman for addressing the Senate.

In response to an inquiry from the floor, President Thalmann stated that it was his impression that the grievance policies and procedures in effect at this time are the ones contained in the current, 1987 Faculty Handbook, because the new revisions have not yet been agreed upon by the Academic Senate and President Sample.

Agenda Item #8: New Business

No new business was discussed.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.