Academic Senate
Present: A. Crigler, G. Davis, W. Dehning, W. Dutton, F. Feldman, T. Habinek, N. Hanel, A. Hendrick, P. Heseltine, B. Jansson, C. Julienne, H. Kaslow, D. Kempler, M. Kinder, B. Knight, R. Koda, B. Kosko, J. Kunc, R. Labaree, T. Levi, S. Lund, N. Lutkehaus, L. Miller, A. Mircheff, P. Nosco, D. O' Leary, W. Petak, N. Petasis, A. Pope, M. Safonov, G. Salem, M. Schuetze-Coburn, H. Schor, C. Synolakis, W. Thalmann, W. Tierney, M. Weinstein
Absent: J. Armour, M. Dudziak, J. Gates, V. Henderson, M. Kann, L. Laine, M. Mazon, K. Price, G. Schierle, N. Stromquist,
Guests: L. Armstrong, K. Chu, N. Kanal, M. Levine, H. Slucki, C. Sullivan, W. Wolf, J. Zernik
President William Tierney called the meeting to order at 2:50 p.m..
Agenda Item #1: Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the September 15, 1999 Senate meeting were approved unanimously.
Agenda Item #2: Announcement of election results for Academic Vice President
President Tierney reported the results of the special election. He announced that Professor William H. Dutton, of the Annenberg School for Communication, was elected Academic Senate Vice President with 70% of the ballots returned.
Agenda Item #3: Nominating Committee Selection
President Tierney explained that although the work of the Nominating Committee will not
begin until early next year, the Committee should be formed at this time. According to the
Bylaws, in addition to the President and Academic Vice President, the Academic Senate
should elect four of its regular members to serve on this Committee. Following
nominations, President Tierney distributed ballots to the senators, which were counted by
the Senate staff and the results were announced at the end of the meeting. The four
Senators elected to the Nominating Committee are:
Loren Laine, School of Medicine
Peter Nosco, College of L.A.S.
William Petak, Policy, School of Planning and Development
Nelly Stromquist, School of Education
Agenda Item #4: Provost's comments
President Tierney welcomed Provost Armstrong who made remarks on several topics:
(a) Provost's web site: All new policies, as well as drafts of policies or reports that may lead to policies will be posted at the Provost's web site, at: http://www.usc.edu/policies/. This would allow everyone to read them and forward any comments to the Provost's office. A number of reports will be available, including a report regarding Teaching Assistants, a report on Healthcare delivery at USC, and a report on Distance Learning.
(b) Class of 2005: A Task Force that included several senior administrators, the Academic Senate President and Past President and others, was set up by the Provost to write a report on what the class of 2005 undergraduate students at USC should look like. The Task Force has addressed a number of issues and options for the university on how to reach the future characteristics of USC students by the year 2005. For example, one question was to determine how far we should push for higher SAT scores, as well as what other goals we should have. The Provost explained that this report will not be shared widely, because it is simply a thinking piece for planning purposes, which might be taken out of context by some. However, the report will be given to the Executive Board of the Senate for comment. The Provost went on to point out that in the past few years USC has experience a dramatic improvement in the quality of the entering class. For example, last year only 37% of applicants were admitted, as compared with up to 60% only a few years ago. At the current rate of the recruitment activities further improvements are expected for next year.
(c) Technology Transfer: Following discussions with a number of faculty, the university is pursuing a number of improvements in this area. In addition to upgrading the Patent Office, the university is setting up company incubators to facilitate new start-up companies. In addition to the EC2 incubator, which is associated with the Annenberg School and has been successful in starting several new companies, another new incubator at the Health Sciences campus is being planned, in order to stimulate activities in health-related areas. In addition to creating new opportunities, the university will set-up new rules and guidelines in order to avoid any interference with the academic mission of the university.
The Provost then responded to questions by the senators. One senator asked if this improvement in student quality is permanent or temporary and whether this repositions USC as among the highly valuable universities. Provost Armstrong replied that there is a "winner take all" situation, with the more highly valuable universities taking much more applications, while others are not doing as well. This situation is coupled with what is going on in the corporate world, where there is an increasing push for hiring "winners" from the "best schools". The more valuable the graduates are perceived by the corporations and their consultants, the value for the schools becomes even higher. The Provost went on to say that USC should try to find its own niche and not try to mimic other schools. For example, USC has many more professional schools than other universities and as a result it attracts different type of students.
Another senator asked if there are plans for a Science Park near the main campus. The Provost replied that the university is seeking a large land near the Health Science campus to be used for this purpose. Ultimately such incubators would bring high-tech companies and create new jobs in the area. In response to a question regarding the kind of student that USC is seeking, Provost Armstrong replied that new students would have widespread interests. He also said that we need to continue to improve our retention rate.
A senator asked if it possible for USC to seek to change the way the State allocates
funds for higher education. Provost Armstrong responded by saying that, while cal grants
were increased by Governor Wilson, it seems that Governor Davis is putting a greater
emphasis on the UC system, with policies that would create further competition with USC.
President Tierney gave an update on the status of the following issues:
(a) Tenure Clock: The white paper on Tenure Clock issues was forwarded to the Special Committee on Promotion and Tenure, chaired by Professor Laurie Brand.
(b) Interdisciplinary Planning: A Task Force was formed, chaired by Professor Hilary Schor to study the issue and make recommendations.
(c) Under-Represented Faculty: A task force chaired by Professor John Slaughter will gather data and report to the Senate in the Spring.
(d) Department Chair election: All comments from the Faculty Councils regarding this issue were forwarded to the Faculty Handbook Committee, chaired by Professor William Thalmann for their comments.
(e) Faculty Representation on the Board of Trustees: This issue was referred to the Committee on University Administration chaired by Professor J. Lawford Anderson for comment.
(f) Retirement Policy: The proposed policy should be available soon for comment. A special Senate meeting on this issue will be held on Friday November 12.
(g) Distance Learning: By the end of October we should have a report for comment, with final recommendations expected during the Spring.
(h) Senate website: A memo was distributed at the meeting which gives a detailed information about the status of the Senate website, which is organized by R. Labaree. This has been delayed due to shortages in the availability of web-designing staff at the Information Services Division. In response to a question, President Tierney said that there is a budget in place to keep updating the web site on a continuing basis. He also said that eventually the web site should have links to the School Councils, which should coordinate their efforts on this matter with the Senate. Any comments regarding the web site should be e-mailed to labaree@usc.edu.
Agenda Item #6. Violence Policy - Resolution 99/00-01
President Tierney introduced the following Resolution by the Executive Board:
WHEREAS, it is important to specify principles and procedures for creating a safe climate on campus for all employees.
BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Academic Senate endorses in principle the proposed "Violence Policy" and authorizes the Executive Board to work with the Administration on the final changes of the document.
President Tierney gave a brief background on the development of this policy which has been going on for a couple of years. Since last year the Executive Board has reviewed several drafts of this policy and made many suggestions and improvements that were incorporated in the policy. The Executive Board is comfortable with the current draft of the policy. Since there is an urgency to have a policy in place as soon as possible, we need to decide soon if this is acceptable to the Senate.
A senator asked if this document can be placed on the web for further comments. He also pointed out that the Threat Assessment Teams include only six faculty, while Business Affairs is over-represented. Moreover, he said, members of the Department of Public Safety (DPS), including student officers, may have a conflict and should not be represented in the Threat Assessment Teams. In addition there have been recent incidents of DPS personnel involved in violence themselves.
Past President Thalmann pointed out that more faculty should be included in the Threat Assessment Teams, when faculty members are involved. A senator wondered if only faculty should be included in those cases, while another senator replied that we should not assume that faculty are the best people to judge these situations, while faculty often do not have the necessary expertise or do not want to participate in any way.
Several senators commented that the policy is well thought out and provides safeguards for possible unintended consequences. They also congratulated the Executive Board for helping to shape the policy. However, one senator pointed out that the current draft does not seem to affect people with power, namely administrators. Another senator replied that Senior administrators are either faculty members or staff, and therefore are covered by the policy.
A senator commented on the first category of examples of acts of violence, that includes "É being aggressively belligerent É" which may be part of a common behavior that is not necessarily violence. Another senator replied that these situations will be cleared-up by the Threat Assessment Teams. Regarding those threatening suicide, a comment was made that these people need help and counseling rather than prosecution under this policy. It was also suggested that this should be left out of the policy and perhaps there should be a separate statement about suicide. However, it was pointed out that people that are threatening suicide often can take others with them and therefore are a threat.
Additional comments were made regarding the inappropriate use of the term "supervisors" when referring to faculty. Also, it was suggested that true violence should be distinguished from acts of expression of speech, such as in a protest or demonstration.
Vice Provost Levine pointed out that Federal Law mandates that the university has a policy regarding violence and it should be clear how to deal with incoming complaints. He also suggested that it does not matter that much where members of the panels come from, as long as they are trained on how to deal with these situations.
After some additional discussion, President Tierney said that the Senate has two options: we can continue to discuss this issue and bring it up again next time, thereby sidetracking other issues, or the senators can continue to send comments to the Executive Board which can be authorized by the Senate to make any final changes.
A senator suggested that the resolution needs further clarification and is not ready for a vote. Therefore, he made a motion to table the resolution. This motion did not pass with 8 in favor and 14 opposed. Other senators made motions to make changes to the resolution regarding the explicit inclusion of administrators, the exclusion of DPS members from Threat Assessment Teams and to change the wording about suicide so that someone contemplating suicide is not dissuaded from seeking help. President Tierney accepted these as friendly amendments that the Executive Board would take into consideration as it works with the administration for the final draft. Resolution 99/00-01 was then endorsed with 27 in favor, 1 opposed, and 1 abstention.
Agenda Item #7. New Business
No new business was discussed.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.
_______________
Respectfully Submitted,
Nicos A. Petasis
Professor of Chemistry
Secretary General of the Academic Senate