Faculty Senate

Minutes - October 17, 2022 - 3:05pm - Online through WebEx

CCSU FACULTY SENATE MEETING

Present: Acharya, K.; Al-Masoud, N.; Amaya, L.; Andreoletti, C.; Arena, J.; Barr, B.; Best, F.; Bigelow, L.; Boone, N.; Boscarino, N.; Bray, A.; Broulik, W.; Casas, L.; Cole, E.; Donohue, P.; Duquette, J.; Elfant, A.; Emeagwali, G.; Evans, M.; Fallon, M.; Farhat, J.; Farrish, K.; Foshay, J.; Foster, P.; Garbovskiy, Y.; Hazan, S.; Heinen, E.; Hernandez, R.; Horrax, S.; Jackson, M.; Kapper, M.; Karas, R,; Kelly, D.; King, A.; Kulesza, M.; Langevin, K.; Love, K.; Lui, R.; Martin, K.; Matthews, S.; Matzke, B.; McCarthy, M.; Meng, P.; Mitchell, D.; Moriarty, M.; Nicastro, M.; Ning, W.; O'Connor, J.; Ofray, J.; Orange, M.; Oyewumi, Y.; Paolina, J.; Recoder-Nunez, L.; Rodgers-Tonge, D.; Salama, T.; Savatorova, V.; Schenck, S.; Schmidt, S.; Seamans-Frizzell, S.; Smith, J.; Smith, R.; Sogunro, O.; Spear, B.’ Spinelli, A.; Sugg, K.; Telllier, A.; Tudisca, B.; Turenne, L.; Villanti, S.; Wang, W.; Werblow, J.; Zabihimayvan, M.; Zadi, S.; Zhao, S.; Zhou, B.

Ex-Officio:Blitz, D.; Burkholder, T.; Frank, L.; Minkler, S.; Toro, Z.; Wolff, R.

 

Parliamentarian: Dimmick, C.

President of the Senate: Latour, F.

Guests: Bucher, L.; Byrd Danso, K.; Cintorino, S.; Claffey, G.; DeLaura, J.; Fuentes, R.; Greenebaum, J.; Jacobson, L.; Kalder, R.; Kirby, Y.; Larsen, K.; Mahony, M.; McGrath, K.; Merenstein, B.; Meyer, K,; Misra, K.; Moreland, D.; Pincince, T.; Robinson, C.; Thompson, T.; Tully, J.; Veloria, C.; Votto, S.; Wright, C.

1. Minutes

The minutes of September 26, 2022 were approved.

2. Announcements:

a. AAUP President (T. Burkholder)

b. SUOAF-AFSCME (S. Villanti)

c. SGA (O. Olamuyiwa)

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

e. President of the Senate (F. Latour)

3. Elections

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 and Secretary by Monday, noon)  

a.Committee on Constitution and Bylaws

5. Unfinished Business

a. DEC Exception, Part 3
  • MOTION: to approve a DEC exception for the Department of Theatre, as presented with the agenda. 
  • R. Smith asked if it was customary for there to be a DEC with only one member of the host department.  F. Latour noted that in at least one instance, there was a DEC with no members of the host department and that this is permissible.
  • Motion passed.
b. Discussion of concerns regarding Graduate Studies (with guest S. Minkler)
  • F. Latour introduced Associate Vice President Dr. Steven Minkler to lead a discussion about what is happening right now to the School of Graduate Studies.  We are told that the duties of the former School are now being distributed among the four schools. He also noted that issues of shared governance have arisen.
  • S. Minkler presented these prepared remarks summarizing recent changes to the administration of Graduate Studies.
  • Sen. Jackson expressed concern about not hearing in Dr. Minkler’s remarks that the Graduate Studies Committee (GSC) would be used as a sounding board.  He also stated that section 2.3 of the Senate’s Constitution states that “University organizational structure” is something where the Senate should also have an advisory role, and a lot of what has just been presented has already happened. He asked whether the appropriate committees were consulted about the changes that have already taken place?  S. Minkler indicated he has spoken with Prof.  Jacobson about working more closely together in the future. He stated that Prof. Jacobson has been a good partner in this effort, and that he appreciates her concerns which have been made very clear to him.
  • Sen. Barr thanked Sen. Jackson for the question and indicated that he respectfully feels that the response from Dr. Minkler fell short of shared governance standards.  He then asked about how the academic deans feel about having the graduate work distributed to the deans’ offices. He asked to hear from all four of the deans.
  • Dean Wolff thanked Sen. Barr for the question.  He stated that the transition has been discussed in the leadership council and is underway, although there are some bumps along the way.  The Dean noted he is the CLASS Dean contact for graduate studies.
  • Interim Dean Frank noted that in the School of Business there is a graduate advisor and an assistant dean who are working well on the transition pieces.  Again, there have been bumps along the way, but people are working well together, and things are moving forward.
  • AVP Minkler noted he is the contact in SEST and also the university contact for Graduate Studies in his AVP role.  He also noted that over the summer the university hired administrative operations assistants.  In CLASS the person is Courtney Rehmer and in SEPS it is Alex Correia. In SoB there is a graduate advisor, Dana Wilkie, and we will be hiring someone in SEST. He also noted that he and the deans will be meeting with the graduate coordinators and that he and Dr. Kostelis will be meeting with Prof. Jacobson and attending the next meeting of the Graduate Studies Committee.
  • Sen. Smith noted that Political Science does not have a graduate program, but she is interested in this topic, so she reviewed the schools’ web pages and noted that the language there does not make it clear that the deans’ offices handle graduate programs as well.  In particular, she noted that the CLASS mission statement only addresses undergraduate programs. She stated that we need to ensure that the web is updated to express that the schools and college serve both undergraduate and graduate students. Otherwise, students will not know where to go to get the information they need to enroll.
  • S. Minkler thanked Sen. Smith for the comments and noted that a landing page for graduate students is under development. There will also be a landing page for faculty to find forms and other things they made need.
  • Sen. Arena asked whether there is precedence for Graduate School decentralization at other institutions?
  • S. Minkler said he does not have an example to give. C. Robinson noted that across the nation, schools are going in both directions: decentralizing and decentralizing their graduate programs.
  • An anonymous Senator asked, via F. Latour, why was there such a delay in communicating this change? 
  • S. Minkler said that these assignments were made in late May, as we approached Commencement and Summer, and there was a desire to have individual conversations with Dr. Jacobson and several key faculty before sending out a broader message.  He reiterated a desire to work more closely together going forward, including making modifications to the plan.
  • Sen Emeagwali asked, “Is this decentralization move a cost-saving measure?”
  • S. Minkler noted the objective is to place the administration and communication between our graduate faculty and coordinators and the students at that level. That is where our curriculum lies; faculty own the curriculum.  It meant to provide the resources in the schools to do that that are less expensive than hiring an army of associate vice Presidents of graduate studies in each school  In some ways it will not be a huge savings or cost; it is a matter or reallocating resources we have to ensure they are best put in the classrooms and in the provision of graduate studies at the school level.
  • Sen. Al-Masoud asked about marketing efforts.  Will they be centralized? 
  • S. Minkler said there is an opportunity for the university-wide office of graduate studies to coordinate the marketing so that there are cost efficiencies.
  • Sen. Jackson said he can see positives about this type of organization, and one of them is curriculum.  It has always been complicated because the dean of the school has control of the budget, and the Dean of Graduate Studies never had a budget.  Many times, this led to graduate programs being pushed off to the Graduate School and not thoroughly reviewed at the school level.  There can be some benefit to streamlining this.  The downside is that the nice thing about having a centralized approach, there was someone to oversee all of the graduate programs to ensure consistency.
  • Sen. Sugg asked “Colleagues have noted that some funds (scholarships, etc.) were recently acquired by the School of Graduate Studies. What will happen to those funds and how will they be distributed?”
  • S. Minkler asked if this was about GSA monies, in particular. If this is the case, there will be a group of individuals working on how the funds will be distributed in accordance with the GSA guidelines.  His office will also be sending out a communication about other funding. 
  • Sen. Barr: We keep talking about organizational structure. I'm wondering if there has been a discussion that may begin with a question such as: What does the graduate program in your department need in order to be better and more intellectually rigorous?
  • S. Minkler said he feels this gets to the commitment to retrench, take a step back and work more closely with the faculty and the GSC.  We do need to address declining graduate enrollments and working together we can come up with a plan that works for everyone. 
  • F. Latour noted we understand graduate enrollment is down, as Dr. Toro mentioned at the beginning of the semester.  One thing we saw in the Dean or AVP of Graduate Studies was for there to be an advocate for the programs and someone to suggest new programs and work with faculty on new programs.  The decentralization puts having a main advocate at risk, particularly because S. Minkler has such a broad portfolio, whereas the Dean of Graduate Studies had a tighter focus.
  • S. Minkler said that there are now, in fact, more advocates for graduate programs, including the president herself. It will be important to listen to graduate faculty to hear about their ideas for increasing enrollments and generating new markets. 
  • Dr. Toro asked S. Minkler about considering different alternatives. She said that she was surprised to see how far along these changes were and proposed we go back and start where we should have started – a conversation with the Graduate Studies Committee and the Graduate coordinators, before making any final decisions. S. Minkler noted that.  Sen. Barr thanked President Toro and asked her whether she means as far back as reinstating the Dean of Graduate Studies.  Dr. Toro clarified that what she suggested is to start a conversation with the GSC and Graduate Coordinators about whether there are any other models that we could consider. She stated was not suggesting going back to the old model.
  • Sen. Barr asked about next steps. Dr Toro said that a previous provost transitioned the traditional Dean of Graduate Studies position into the position that Christine Robinson held previously.  She said we may now – going through shared governance and consulting all parties involved – come up with some other model is the way we should go.
  • Sen. King thanked Dr. Toro and said she believes this is the best way forward.  
  • Sen. Best endorsed the direction that Dr. Toro suggested.
  • Prof. Kalder asked, in the meantime do we revert to the way things had been run or are we still staying with the changes that have been proposed. Dr. Toro said she suggests that none of the changes be implemented. She suggested we go through the state of affairs before implementing any changes.
c. Academic Advising Update – Task Force
  • F. Latour said that President Toro has suggested the creation of a Task Force on Academic Advising. This was in the long email that was distributed about advising and that he is going to have a meeting with the provost on this matter. 
  • Sen. Jackson said that this is also an issue of shared governance because in that memo, it was noted that alternate PIN numbers are no longer needed. He noted that this is a major change to the advising process and asked whether the Senate’s committee on advising was involved in those discussions.  He noted that their last minutes from March 21, 2022 made a reference to a discussion of distribution of PIN numbers.  Now, they don’t exist anymore.  He asked what motivation is there for students to get advising? F. Latour noted that the university will be launching an aggressive communication plan to encourage students to seek advising.
  • Sen. Jackson asked if any Senate committee was asked to provide input on this matter.  F. Latour stated he does not believe so. Dr. Toro said that was the motivation she had to ask Fred to work with the provost to put the task force together. She indicated that the President of the Senate will be appointing half of the members of the Task Force on Academic Advising and the other half will be appointed by the provost. The task force will look at best practices and how best to advise over the summer. Matters relating to faculty compensation for advising over the summer will also be reviewed.  Dr. Toro took ownership for making the decision to drop the PIN requirement so that students could register for the Fall semester. Then, there was a miscommunication about what to do now, with regard to Spring registration. She took full ownership for that, as well.
  • Sen. Barr indicated he thinks there needs to be a greater conversation about this.  He said students often feel confident about their ability to set up their schedules, and they make mistakes.  The PIN was a way to stop them from making mistakes that would hurt them in the end.  He asked Dr. Toro to enable a process in which we could increase our 4 (or 4.5) year graduate rates.
  • Sen. King spoke in favor of a broader conversation. She contrasted advising in a small department with advising in a large department or program that involves a lot of sequencing.
  • Sen. Al-Masoud asked if there was any chance that this proposal could be reconsidered at this time. He cited that his academic program is very sequential and that some courses are only offered once a year, meaning a mistake could cost a student one whole year.
  • Dr. Toro said she does not now what the complexities are, but after a meeting with a group last year, she asked if this can be changed and was told that an email was already sent to students.  She offered going back to her team to see if the process can be changed. However, she said she still believes that a broader conversation (i.e., the task force) is needed and said that, if it did not violate the AAUP contract, departments could decide that only a subset of the faculty in the department would do the advising.
  • Prof. Kalder spoke in favor of advising and good advising. She said mistakes are costly. Whenever needed, she does the advising herself.  She has seen ineffective advising in her own department and she has, in fact, not assigned advisees to faculty who do not advise effectively.

6. Adjournment