...

Notes from the Academic Senate Chair

by user

on
Category: Documents
3

views

Report

Comments

Transcript

Notes from the Academic Senate Chair
University of California Academic Senate
T H E S E N AT E S O U R C E
Volume
VolumeVI,
XII,Issue
Issue41
August 2008
November
2013
http://www.ucop.edu/senate/
Notes from the Academic Senate Chair
William Jacob
[email protected]
Dear Colleagues,
Welcome to the start of a new academic
year. This is a challenging time for me, as I
step into a new position after a year as
Senate vice chair, and for the University,
as it embarks on a major leadership transition. I am eager to take on the challenges and look forward to
working with President Napolitano, the Academic Council, the
administration, and the Regents on the most important issues
facing the University.
Clearly, many of the most critical issues are financial, and
the Senate will be working this year to ensure that fiscal health,
competitive total remuneration for faculty, and adequate support and infrastructure for faculty research are among the University’s highest priorities.
In August, the systemwide Senate office prepared a briefing booklet for President Napolitano that includes a primer on
UC shared governance and a summary of Senate views, including disagreements with the administration, on topics such as
total remuneration, graduate education, research, admissions,
UCRP, and rebenching. I have emphasized to President Napolitano that the Senate is a source of enormous brainpower and
analytical expertise, that we take our consulting role seriously,
and that we want to collaborate closely with the administration
to tackle thorny issues. I noted that while the Senate’s deliberative process can be lengthy, it is able to address critical issues
from multiple perspectives and produce quality results in part
because we take the time to deliberate and consult broadly
through an established committee structure.
I have been following the ongoing conversations occurring
in California and nationally about the purpose of higher education. Over the past year, we have seen new legislative pressures
to standardize undergraduate education across UC campuses
and across the public higher education segments, including
through online education. The focus of these conversations is
usually access, affordability, and accountability, defined narrowly. The national media regularly produces articles about the
growing cost of higher education, and state legislatures propose metrics and benchmarks intended to ascertain whether
public universities are spending taxpayers’ dollars wisely. In
California, the metrics typically mentioned relate to undergraduate graduation and time to degree rates for freshmen and
transfers, tuition, and student debt. Undergraduate education
and “efficiencies” receive nearly all the attention, often to the
exclusion of UC’s role as the state’s premier public research
and graduate education institution.
In fact, UC has an outstanding record of achievement in
undergraduate education, according to any metric. UC’s four
and six year graduation rates have been improving steadily over
time and are now among the best among UC’s Comparison 8
and other AAU universities. Additionally, it has expanded access
Continued on page 4
Academic Council
Welcomes
President Napolitano
A
t her first meeting with the Academic Council on October 23, UC
President Janet Napolitano wasted no time engaging the faculty
in shared governance when she asked the Senate to work with
the administration on a strategy for addressing racial bias and discrimination on the campuses.
Although the Council had expected to engage the new President
in a discussion of three of the Senate’s highest priorities—enrollment
management, educational quality, and faculty quality—the issue of the
day was a report from a five-member panel headed by former California Supreme Court Justice Carlos Moreno addressing complaints of
racial bias and discrimination affecting UCLA faculty.
The “Moreno Report,” which was released on October 15, was
commissioned by UCLA Chancellor Block last year to investigate claims
by faculty members of color there. It makes several recommendations
for institutional policy reform.
President Napolitano called for the formation of a SenateAdministration working group to respond to the recommendations in
the Moreno Report, focusing on local processes for bringing, collecting
and investigating complaints and imposing sanctions; how the UC system should respond to the three major recommendations of the report;
and ways to improve the faculty diversity pipeline.
The President made it clear that she is very troubled by the report.
“The Moreno Report is a clarion call to look at ourselves and deal
with the issues more thoroughly than in the past,” she said. “There is a
crisis in how we deal with allegations of discrimination and the culture
from which they emerge–the way we treat each other on campuses,
the kind of language we use, and the actions and consequences, both
for the victim and the perpetrator. We have a challenge before us. This
is something we need to get right.”
The President said she views the issues cited in the report as a
systemwide problem requiring a systemwide approach. As such, she
has asked all ten Chancellors and the systemwide Continued on page 2
President Napolitano at the Academic Council meeting, October 23, 2013
Access the Senate Source online at http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/senate/news/source/
Senate to respond to the issues and
recommendations raised in the report and to evaluate all related policies, including APM 015
(the Faculty Code of Conduct), and divisional procedures overseen by the Senate committees on Privilege and Tenure.
“Right now the campus systems are all over the place,”
she said.
Council members echoed these concerns and expressed
a strong desire to look carefully at existing accountability systems to ensure that faculty have avenues to express complaints, and that meaningful consequences exist in response
to such incidents.
“This is a critical issue that will require the Senate and
administration to work together,” said Academic Council Chair
Jacob. “Every division chair should work with his or her Chancellor to review campus policies and procedures, and I will
also ask for advice from expert systemwide committees, including UCAAD, UCAP and UCP&T.”
Council members also noted the need to make diversity
a value among the entire faculty and cited examples of efforts
on specific campuses to ensure that networks of mentoring
support and encouragement exist, and that awareness of
diversity and equity is present in all stages of recruitment,
hiring, promotion, and retention. Provost Dorr offered to compile recent efforts in this area, including campus salary equity
plans, the implementation of APM 210.1-d, which recognizes
contributions to diversity in merit and promotion cases, and
the recommendations of the President’s Advisory Council on
Campus Climate, Culture and Inclusion. These efforts can
serve as a basis for discussion and as a source of best practices that already exist on some campuses.
Senate Chair Jacob emphasized that the President has a
standing invitation to attend Academic Council meetings, and
expects the Council to engage her in the near future in an
introductory discussion of the Senate’s highest priorities.
In addition, the President began a “listening and learning” tour of UC campuses the week after she arrived at UCOP
on September 30. Each visit has included sessions with faculty and Senate leadership. Each Senate was invited to prepare a short briefing document for the president outlining the
Senate’s view of the highest priority campus and systemwide
issues.
UCSD Senate Chair Kit Pogliano notes, “The President
was very engaged and interested in hearing the faculty voice
throughout her visit. She had clearly read our briefing document and looked into several of our critical comments. She
asked excellent follow-up questions. She specifically asked
for our vision of priorities for UCOP and we were politely forthright in presenting our views. I found her to be very receptive
to different points of view and motivated to hear both
strengths and weaknesses.”
President Napolitano noted that the opportunity to lead
the largest, most prestigious public university in the nation
was too good to pass up.
“My passion is education,” she said. “I feel like I’m returning to my roots and where I want to invest in my energies.”
She said as governor of Arizona from 2003 to 2009, she
fought for higher education in a state with a similar youthful
and diverse population. Her experience as the Secretary of
Homeland Security, a department with 22 agencies, many of
which have their own heads, is similar in structure to UC with
its president, ten Chancellors, and three national laboratories.
The President is expected to complete her campus tours
by the end of November. ■
Continued from page 1
Report says New
Admissions Policy
Working as Intended
C
hanges in freshman admissions policy approved by the Regents
in 2009 and first implemented for students entering the university in fall 2012 have allowed campuses to select a group of
students who are more diverse and better prepared academically, says a
new report from the Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools
(BOARS).
In Impact of the New Freshman Eligibility Policy at the University of
California: A Report to the Regents of the University of California, BOARS
describes early outcomes from the new “9-by-9” policy. Some are promising—for example, higher average first-term GPAs and retention rates,
and lower average probation rates for students who began at UC in fall
2012 compared to freshmen who were selected under the old policy
and began in 2010 or 2011, and an increasing percentage of California
high school graduates from underrepresented minority groups who declared their intent to register at a UC campus between 2010 and 2013.
However, BOARS is also careful to note that it is difficult to attribute any specific academic or diversity outcome directly to the policy. It
also warns that the policy as currently structured will challenge the referral admission system over the long-term.
“BOARS has found strong evidence that admission practices under
the new eligibility policy are meeting the faculty’s goals of removing unnecessary barriers, broadening access to California students, and maintaining academic quality,” said BOARS Chair and UC Berkeley Professor
of Engineering George Johnson. “However, UC’s referral system is facing
significant challenges that must be addressed soon in order to maintain
our Master Plan commitment to California residents.”
BOARS first presented the admissions reform proposal to the Academic Council in August 2007, after four years of study and analysis.
The policy underwent two rounds of systemwide Senate review in the
2007-08 academic year and was ultimately approved by the Assembly of
the Academic Senate in June 2008.
The policy eliminated the SAT Subject Test requirement for basic
admission eligibility and expanded the number of students identified as
Eligible in the Local Context (ELC) from the top 4% of graduates in each
California high school to the top 9%. The ELC students, together with
students identified as the top 9% statewide based on an index of standardized test scores and GPA in UC-approved courses, are assured of
admission to a UC campus – either one to which they applied or by a
referral offer of admission to another UC campus that has available
space.
The policy also introduced a new “Entitled to Review” (ETR) category of California freshman applicants who are guaranteed a comprehensive review of their applications, though not a guarantee of referral
admission, if they meet several minimum markers of college readiness.
In putting forward the policy, BOARS was motivated by a desire to
remove unnecessary barriers to basic eligibility for admission, particularly the Subject Test requirement, which the committee determined had
little predictive bearing on academic performance at UC and differentially affected underrepresented students. BOARS expected the policy
changes to enrich the applicant pool with better prepared students and
result in a more diverse student body.
More students are applying to UC now than under the old policy,
and the report suggests that the expansion of ELC and the introduction
of ETR have removed some of the barriers that may have discouraged
students from applying in the past.
Story continues in link
CDL Launches Open
Access Support Tools
T
he Open Access policy for faculty publications the Academic Senate approved in July 2013 is now being implemented at three UC campuses on a pilot basis.
On November 1, The Office of Scholarly Communication
(OSC) launched a set of web-based tools and resources to
support faculty who want to deposit their scholarly articles
in eScholarship, UC’s open-access repository maintained by
the California Digital Library (CDL), or who wish to opt-out of
the policy by completing a waiver or embargo form. The OSC
website, http://osc.universityofcalifornia.edu, also provides
more information about the policy.
The policy grants UC a limited, non-exclusive right to
make scholarly articles published by UC faculty freely available
in eScholarship. In effect, it reserves the right of UC faculty to
make their work publicly available online, rather than signing
away to their publishers all rights for further distribution.
The policy will be implemented in phases, with UCI, UCLA,
and UCSF as pilot campuses during the 2013-14 academic
year. Faculty on these campuses are expected either to deposit their articles in eScholarship or to indicate if their publications are already openly available elsewhere. They may also
“opt out” and direct the University to waive the license requirement for a particular article (possibly because their publisher
requires it.) Though the 2013-14 implementation is focused
on the three pilot campuses, faculty on the other seven UC
campuses are welcome to deposit their articles in eScholarship immediately if they wish.
The website offers the following:
 a FAQ page detailing the terms of the policy and its implementation
 a streamlined article deposit process into eScholarship
 a waiver or embargo request mechanism
 a list of campus library contacts, who are available to help
faculty sort through the details of the policy
California Digital Library officials say that while the article
deposit process must currently be initiated by faculty members or someone they delegate to act on their behalf, CDL
plans to have a “harvesting” tool in place by the end of this
academic year that helps automate the task of article deposit.
Story continues in link
Under Senate Review
Click here for a comprehensive list of current and past review
items and check the Tracking Log for the progress of all issues.
► Systemwide Review of APM 600 (Comments due 11-25-13)
► Systemwide Review of Senate Bylaw 55 (Comments due 1-
17-14)
► APM 670, 671, 025–HSCP Conflict of Commitment Policies
(Comments due 2-15-14)
► Systemwide review of Proposed Revised UC Policy on Sexual
Harassment and APM 035, Appendices A-1 and A-2
(Comments due 1-23-14)
UCFW Letter Urges
Faculty to Study New
Medical Plan Options
UC
faculty should carefully evaluate the new medical plan options
and other health care benefit changes UC is rolling out during
Open Enrollment for 2014, says an open letter to faculty from the University Committee on Faculty Welfare (UCFW)
The changes include UC Care, a new three-tiered, self-funded PPO
medical insurance plan for UC employees intended to leverage the resources of the UC medical centers. UC is also adding a new Blue Shield
Health Savings Plan option and discontinuing the Anthem Blue Cross PPO
and Health Net Full Network HMO options. The Health Net Blue & Gold
HMO, Kaiser, and Western Health Advantage plans will continue to be available.
The November 12 UCFW letter is part of a flurry of activity by that
committee, the Academic Council, and the campuses, as UC faculty and
staff scramble to understand the new options and decide which will be
most appropriate for their individual circumstances, before the Open Enrollment period ends on November 26.
One of the most important things for UC faculty and staff to know,
says UCFW, is that employees currently enrolled in Anthem who do not initiate changes during the open enrollment period will be assigned to UC Care,
and employees in the Health Net Full Network HMO will be assigned to
Health Net Blue and Gold.
“All employees, and especially all employees currently in any of the
Anthem Blue Cross plans or the Health Net Full Network HMO, should consider carefully the potential trade-offs in costs and choice of medical providers presented by the options,” says UCFW Chair Dan Hare.
UCFW, the Academic Council, and others are also concerned about
the ability of employees to access the least-expensive “UC Select” tier of
Blue Shield providers within UC Care. Employees who utilize providers not
in the UC Select Tier must pay for their services using a more expensive
price structure. UC Care plans to offer broad access to the UC Select tier
through campus-based medical centers, where possible. Access for employees on non-medical center campuses who are not close to a UC medical center will be through non-UC providers in the Blue Shield network that
have agreed to be included in the UC Select tier. This issue is most acute
at Santa Barbara, where the main regional hospital has not agreed to join
the UC Select network, but faculty at other locations also report concerns.
In addition, faculty who regularly travel for extended periods of time for
research and employees whose families face complex or chronic health
challenges may face significant cost increases to access the same quality
of health care previously provided within the discontinued Anthem plans.
Out-of-state emeriti in the discontinued Anthem plans now will be provided
by UC with a $3,000 Health Reimbursement Account to purchase their individual medical coverage through ExtendHealth, a Medicare coordinator,
The Academic Council noted these and other concerns in an October
31 memo to President Napolitano, which also highlights the expertise of
faculty who serve on the UCFW Health Care Task Force (HCTF) in health
care policy and delivery systems, and urges the President to ensure close
consultation with UCFW and HCTF to evaluate and adjust the benefit options next year.
“Council and other Senate agencies intend to monitor the roll-out of
UC Care and engage in discussions of quality improvement for the next
enrollment cycle,” said Senate Chair Jacob. “The Health Care Task Force
includes some of the nation’s leading experts on health care delivery and
can provide excellent advice on costs, benefits, and plan features. The Task
Force and the Senate will be looking closely at options to ensure that UC
Care provides equivalent coverage at all campuses in future years.”
More information about the 2014 Medical Plans and rates can be
found on the At Your Service website. ■
Academic Council members, senior administrators, and President Janet Napolitano at the Academic Council meeting, October 23, 2013
Continued from page 1
so that over 42% of our students come from
Pell grant-eligible families.
But what we hear less often is that UC is also internationally
recognized for the quality and strength of its graduate programs;
that the National Research Council ranks 140 of UC’s 700 doctoral
programs in the top ten nationally in their respective fields; that UC
has produced up to 25% of the faculty in the UC and California State
University systems; and that the bulk of our $5 billion in extramural
funding is possible through the engagement of graduate students.
All of us in the UC community should think about how we can
better communicate the extent to which UC is made great through
research and graduate education, and how graduate education and
research directly impact the undergraduate education experience.
All educational activity at UC is nurtured in the context of the
scholarship and creative work that is central to our research and
service missions. UC faculty are deeply engaged in undergraduate
education—but our research also informs our teaching, and enables
us to bring new knowledge directly to undergraduate classrooms.
Graduate students also advance undergraduate education as teaching assistants. Many are great teachers, but it is their engagement
in the scholarly research enterprise that inspires our undergraduates. New scholarship is developed, validated, and disseminated in
graduate seminars, laboratories and studios. Graduate students are
immersed in these environments and model their experiences when
they interact with undergraduates. They raise the bar we set for undergraduate education significantly.
One of my main goals this year is to incorporate these perspectives into policy conversations to ensure that higher education metrics are not drawn too narrowly. It’s not that we haven’t tried this
already – UC has advertised its research and graduate education
missions consistently over the last two decades – but we need a
new strategy for getting the story out. I hope the Senate and President can work together on that project. Provost Dorr and I discussed
graduate education at the November Regents meeting, and I hope
this will also help open a new and vigorous discussion among the
Regents.
I expect enrollment management to be a major topic of discussion in the Senate this year, as UCOP develops a long-range enrollment plan for the system. An informal working group composed of
Senate members and administrators from UCOP and the campuses
has been sharing information and perspectives on enrollment issues in the context of the current systemwide enrollment planning
process and competing demands related to academic, financial,
access, diversity, space, political, and other pressures. As an informal body, the group will not issue a report or recommendations, but
its notes and ideas will be shared. Its discussions have helped inform a broad spectrum of stakeholders, and will continue to inform
the enrollment planning process.
I am pleased to report that UCOP has agreed to conduct an
updated study of faculty total remuneration to clarify where UC faculty stand against UC’s competitors. Former Senate Chair Bob
Anderson, UCFW Chair Dan Hare, and former UCFW/UCPB Chair Jim
Chalfant are working with the administration to develop an evaluation methodology that will accurately portray the full scope of faculty
compensation and replicate the methodology of the 2009 study as
closely as possible. I expect the methodology plan to be completed
by the end of the calendar year and the final study to be done by
summer 2014.
The Senate continues to engage the administration on the
Composite Benefit Rates project discussed extensively last year.
The administration recently proposed a new rate structure that is
controversial among Senate bodies that have reviewed it. Senate
objections are grounded on the principle that any charges assessed
against a funding source be based on an actual benefit received by
the employee. UCOP has modeled the effect of four new composite
benefit rate scenarios on various fund sources at each campus and
provided the results to the campus budget directors. The Academic
Council will be sharing its concerns with President Napolitano about
the impact of the proposed rates on research grants, and I have
asked divisional Senate chairs to engage their campus administrations in discussions about the models.
An RFP for online course proposals funded through the Innovative Learning Technology Initiative (ILTI) has been released to UC
Senate faculty. ILTI is UC’s plan to use the $10 million the Governor
has asked UC to set aside for online learning technologies. It will
fund online and hybrid course development and a systemwide pilot
effort to facilitate cross-campus enrollment in online courses. ILTI
will not provide any funding for non-matriculated student enrollment
in online courses, a Senate concern in past years.
Finally, I would like to take a moment to ask every Senate faculty member to seriously consider Senate service. Every faculty
member has at least one issue about which they care deeply. I urge
you to find out what Senate committee is involved with your issue
and serve on the committee. Your analytic skill and expertise could
be an invaluable resource to the University and to your colleagues.
Senate service represents an opportunity to share in the governance
of the University and shape its future. It has been an absolute pleasure to work on BOARS and the Academic Council with likeminded
people and fascinating colleagues who care deeply about the University, even when they disagree.
My sons are third generation Cal alumni. The University has
given me and my family so much over the years that I felt obliged to
give back in many ways. When we contribute through Senate service, we help advance the goals of the faculty, but we also advance
this great institution.
Fiat Lux, Bill
THE SENATE SOURCE is published periodically during the academic year by
the Systemwide Senate to inform UC faculty about the activities of the Senate.
Your comments are welcome: [email protected]
William Jacob, 2013-2014 Academic Senate Chair
Michael LaBriola and Clare Sheridan, Co-Editors
University of California Academic Senate, 1111 Franklin Street, 12th Floor, Oakland, CA 94607
Fly UP