Faculty Senate

Minutes - September 27, 2021 - 3:05pm - Online through WebEx

CCSU FACULTY SENATE MEETING

Present: Al-Masoud, N.; Amaya, L.; Atkinson, S.; Best, F.; Bigelow, L.; Bishop, J.; Blitz, D.; Boscarino, N.; Bray, A.; Broulik, W.; Crundwell, G.; Cruz, A.; Donohue, P.; Drew, S.; Dumpson, N.; Duquette, J.; Elfant, A.; Emeagwali, G.; Farrish, K.; Foster, P.; Garbovskiy, Y.; Garcia-Bowen, M.; Gardner, P.; Givens, E.; Gichiru, W.; Gonzalez, K.; Gu, S.; Halkin, S. Hedlund, J.; Hernandez, J.; Holt, J.; Huang, Y.; Hughes, H.; Jackson, M.; Jiao, Y.; Kapper, M.; Kean, K.; Kreeger, J.; Kumar, R.; Langevin, K.; Lewis, M.; Liu, R.; Martin, A.; Matthews, S.; Matzke, B.; McCarthy, M.; Merenstein, B.; Paolino, J.;Phillips, E.; Roark, E.; Robinson, G.; Salama, T.; Salgado, E.; Savatorova, V.; Schenck, S.; Scott, T.; Smith, R.; Sohn, Y.M.; Small, I.; Spear, B.; Sylvester, C.; Tafrate, L.; Thai, N.; Vargas, C.; Villanti, S.; Wang, W.; Washko, L.; Zadi, S.; Zhao, S.; Zidani-Eroglu, L.

Ex-Officio:Burkholder, T.; Kostelis, K.; Mulrooney, J.; Robinson, C.; Toro, Z.; Wolff, R.

 

Parliamentarian: Dimmick, C.

President of the Senate: Latour, F.

Guests: Bucher, L.; Elsinger, N.; Fallon, M.; Kirby, Y.; Magnan, C.; McGrath, K.; Melnyk, J.; Miller, S.; Moreland, D.; Palmer, J.; Tully, J.

1. Minutes

The minutes of the meeting of September 13, 2021 were accepted.

2. Announcements:

a. AAUP President (T. Burkholder)

b. SUOAF-AFSCME President (L. Bigelow)

c. SGA (N. Elsinger)

d. FAC to the Board of Regents (D. Blitz)

e. President of the Senate (F. Latour)

3. Elections

a. Elections Committee**

4. Committee Reports (reports marked with an asterisk are informational reports intended for consent agenda only; if you would like a report to be discussed, please inform the President Elect and Secretary Elect by Monday, noon)  

a. University Athletics Board (P. Resetarits)

  • F. Latour will invite the chair of the University Athletics Board to attend the next Senate meeting to discuss the report.

b. University Planning and Budget Committee (J. Melnyk)

  • The report was posted with the agenda. J. Melnyk reviewed the six major points included in the report. Questions about the report were sought:
  • D. Blitz asked about the first-year priority list ranking and where the list might be available since there was no link in the report. J. Melnyk indicated the raw data file would be refined and posted.
  • D. Blitz asked for a “top level” spreadsheet that summarizes total revenue and the origins of that revenue, and the various expenses. He stated it would be ideal to have one that showed comparison to the prior year. J. Melnyk pointed to the documents contained in point 1 in the UPBC report.
  • G. Crundwell pointed to the historical expenditure data and the two pie charts for FY10 and FY20. The amounts have gone up, but the shares of the pie, so to speak, have not changed. He asked whether the UPBC could look at the two charts and indicate where any substantial changes occurred. J. Melnyk expressed that perhaps there were some changes caused by the pandemic.

5. New Business

a. DEC exceptions for 2021-22

  • J. Melnyk led a adiscussion with the Senate about enrollment. It began with a question: how many Fall students do not register for the Spring? Last Fall it was 1023. The percentage change in total enrollment ranges from 2.5% to 9.5% per year. A full-time commuter student for the year is roughly $10K in income. Wehen you try to investigate why we lose students, it is not really clear. Academic Affairs has done some exit interviews and the answers vary by student. First-year students were surveyed this summer and of the roughly 800 who were asked if they plan to graduate from Central, 89% said yes.
  • 46% of our revenue last year was in tuition & fees. Another portion comes from the State and it is based on a three-year average, so downturns in one year will effect income for three years.
  • Faculty have asked why the UPBC looks at enrollment. The answer is that enrollment impacts revenue and that impacts both budget and planning.
  • Jay shared an email from a student who was thanking a professor for reaching out to them to see if they were OK. He closed with asking faculty and staff to reach out to students to try to help them get and stay connected to CCSU. Jay closed with asking ‘How can we make a difference in mitigating what we know is going to happen from Fall to Spring, when some number of students will not return?’
    • D. Blitz noted that reduced enrollment of incoming students each year has to be worked out with the System as whole because they are putting a lot of pressure on community college students about competing two years at a community college, virtually free due to the PAC program. That necessarily will reduce the number of students coming into CCSU (for example, the students who would come to CCSU after one year at a community college will now stay two years at the community college.)
      • D. Blitz asked: Do you have figures on how many of the students who left had a GPA below 2.8? J. Melnyk indicated 200 were academically dismissed; over 800 were not, they just left on their own.
    • President Toro commented on the notion that we admit unqualified students. She said it is important to look at GPA trends. The SAT scores have been constant; they have not gone down. Also, when we admit students who are not academically qualified, two pieces of information are important to know: we admit fewer students than Southern and Western; we admit only 75%. Eastern admits 74%, Southern 84% and we have higher GPAs for the incoming class, compared to Southern and Western, and so is the case with SAT scores. We may be claiming they are not academically prepared, yet two of our sister institutions are admitting less academically prepared students and they are not facing the enrollment decline that we are facing. In addition, for this year’s incoming class, we have higher achievers and the highest socio-economic profile we’ve ever had. It is important to have this information. Otherwise, we may be reaching a conclusion that may not be validated by data.
    • J. Melnyk noted that the number of students being dismissed or put on academic probation has not increased.
    • J. Melnyk added that advising begins at the end of October and registration in the beginning of November. That means we have a way to go before registration begins and we have time to share strategies for helping students succeed.
    • J. Bishop shared that her department was bringing alumni back onto campus to speak with students on what it means to persist and graduate. She noted there are jobs out there now.
    • F. Latour indicted that some students have had a reduced person-to-person experience until now and that we should make every effort to encourage students to get engaged in what is happening on campus now. Doing so will make it more likely that students will stay.
    • S. Villanti asked how many of the 1023 were on probation or below a 2.0. Is it a high percentage? J. Melnyk noted 2-4% of students are on probation.
    • D. Blitz asked “How many counselors do we have to deal with mental health problems - which are increasing due in part to the pandemic and its effects on them and their family?” A representative of the Counseling Center indicated there are 5 full-time counselors.
    • Sen. R. Smith revisited the question about how many of the 1023 were struggling. She cautioned that this is not a simple question because some may have a GPA high enough to avoid academic probation, but so low that they will not be able to complete their program of first-choice (e.g., a Nursing student can be in good standing, but not able to succeed in the Nursing program.) The BGS is one solution, but there should be others; how can they get into another major?
    • Interim Dean Mulrooney noted that he has been shepherding and promoting the BGS, and agrees that it is not the only choice for students who fail out of their chosen major. He stated he feels it is our responsibility to recognize when a skill set is not there, to help students recognize what skill set they do have and direct them toward a program where they can be more successful. The BGS or walking away are not the only two choices.
    • G. Crundwell noted that on the collegiate level, female coaches at Colby College are suing for pay equity. When you look at assistant and head coaches pay at CCSU, you will find that male head coaches at CCSU makes $225k (6) while female head coaches make $157k (8). And male assistant coaches make $68k (20) while female assistant coaches make $45k (15). (Numbers in parenthesis are headcount.)
      • He noted that the strategic plan includes a lot about equity and he is wondering if anything is in the works to look at the pay inequities that are starting to show up heavily in AAUP coaching ranks? S. Villanti responded saying the Athletics program is headed to the middle of the pack in the conference and feels we are competitive.
      • T. Burkholder asked if we could push the NEC to push the pay equity issue? S. Villanti said we could ask them to do a study for the whole conference.
      • President Toro commented that we are the only public institution in our conferences, so equity from our perspective may be different than that in the private sector. S. Villanti also noted that the salaries are governed by the AAUP contract, which provides opportunity for promotions and raises, and many coaches have been at CCSU a long time and their salaries include longevity payments.
      • F. Best noted that the revenue a sport brings in is often considered when salaries are set and that we should be looking at whether men coaching women’s sports are being paid more than women coaching the same sport. He wondered if there is any data available here at CCSU?
      • F. Best stated it would be good to have an analysis to see whether salary distribution by gender suffers from explicit or implicit bias.
      • F. Latour noted that if the Senate were to look at this, it would be appropriate to do so through the University Athletics Board. F. Latour indicated he could have a conversation with the UAB Chair prior to the next meeting, since the Chair would be coming to that meeting.
      • S. Villanti reiterated that longevity is going to have an impact on the salary distribution.

6. Adjournment

    • The meeting adjourned at 4:51pm.