RUTGERS UNIVERSITY SENATE
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
M I N U T E S
April 13, 2018


MEMBERS PRESENT:  Boikess, Borisovets, Esposito, Gillett (Chair), Gould, Krapivin, Oliver, Parsa, Settles, Thompson, Van Stine

MEMBERS EXCUSED:    Kelly, Scoloveno

MEMBERS ABSENT: Walters

ALSO ATTENDING:  B. Lee (Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs), M. Mickelsen (Executive Secretary), S. Rabinowitz (Faculty Representative to the Board of Governors), R. Schwartz (Faculty Representative to the Board of Trustees), M. Soto (RBHS At-Large Senator)

The regular meeting of the University Senate Executive Committee was held on Friday, April 13, 2018 at 12:00 p.m. in Room 116ABC at the Busch Student Center, Busch Campus.

1.    Chair’s Report  - Peter Gillett, Senate Chair

Senate and Executive Committee Chair Peter Gillett called the meeting to order at 12:00 p.m. He spoke about:
2.    Secretary’s Report - Mary Mickelsen, Executive Secretary of the Senate
3.    Administrative Liaison

Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs Barbara Lee presented an administrative report, which included comments on:
Lee then responded to questions, or heard comments on the above subjects, as well as:
4.    Schedule of Senate and Executive Committee Meetings, Academic Year 2018-19
Revised per previous Executive Committee action.  Final schedule was approved by the Executive Committee.

5.    Schedule of  Agenda Item Submission Dates, Academic Year 2018-19 - Approved
6.    Issue Raised by Faculty Senator Martha Soto, RBHS At-Large, regarding the Communication regarding the Financial and Employment Impacts from Barnabas and RBHS Merger.  
   
The following is an email sent to Chair Peter Gillett from Senator Soto on April 6, 2018:
         

To introduce this topic, please note the two messages below (two dramatically different messages being circulated this week about the financial and employment impacts from the merge between Barnabas and RBHS).

 The finances of my Department, Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, have already been enormously affected by the Barnabas merger.  Most of our hospital testing, one main source of financial revenue for any Pathology Department, was privatized overnight, putting not just our finances at risk, but also our educational mission.  Our new chair, freshly recruited from out of state, and our new Dean were powerless to stop this.  This happened more than a year ago, and we are still struggling to recover.  At NJMS, entire medical divisions have been shifted from U. Hospital to Beth Israel, by Barnabas, with little or no warning.

As one of the At-Large Senators for RBHS, and a member of the Senate Finance Committee, I feel compelled to raise the concerns for the RBHS faculty and staff regarding how the Barnabas-RBHS merger is being conducted, and bout the flow of communication, or misinformation, as the case my be.

Letter from Chancellor Brian Strom: "Update on Discussions with Robert Wood Johnson-Barnabas Health"

Letter from AAUP-BHSNJ President Roger Johansen: "The Truth about RWJ Barnabas and Rutgers" 

Senator Soto's concerns were discussed at length and it was decided no Senate action was warranted at this time.  However, Peter Gillett will invite Chancellor Strom to the June 8 Executive Committee meeting to address the issues raised.

7.    Committees/Panels

Committee Reports:

University Structure and Governance Committee (USGC) Response to Charge S-1604 on Process for Unit Mergers or Other Structural Changes - Jon Oliver, USGC Chair

The USGC has been charged as follows:  

Consider and recommend a procedure, timeline, template, and process for merger or dissolution of, or making structural changes to, non-academic units that have a broad educational impact.  Refer to the Senate report and recommendations on Charge S-1403, Process for Unit Mergers or Other Structural Changes, when considering this charge.

Oliver summarized his committee's report on Charge S-1403:  Process for Unit Mergers or Other Structural Changes. The Executive Committee suggested minor formatting changes and docketed the report for the April 27 Senate meeting.

University Structure and Governance Committee (USGC) Response to Charge A-1710 on Policy on Centers and Institutes - Jon Oliver, USGC Chair

The USGC has been charged as follows:  

Review the draft revised University Policy on Centers and Institutes (University Policy 10.1.5) and the accompanying guidelines for the preparation of proposals for the creation of centers and institutes, and for periodic CI progress reports.  Make appropriate recommendations.

Oliver summarized his committee's report on Charge A-1710:  Policy on Centers and Institutes.  After discussing the report and Senior Vice President Lee's suggestion to incorporate the CAPR report, the Executive Committee docketed the report for the April 27 Senate meeting, pending EC approval of changes via email.

Academic Standards, Regulations, and Admissions Committee (ASRAC) Response to Charge S-1602 on Policies on Excused Student Absences for Religious Observances - Robert Schwartz and Matt Winkler, ASRAC Co-chairs

The ASRAC has been charged as follows:  

At the request of Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs Barbara Lee, consider Rutgers' policies on excused student absences for religious observance, and make recommendations on how best to revise those policies in light of the increasing diversity of the Rutgers student body.

Schwartz summarized his committee's report on S-1602: Policies on Excused Student Absences for Religious Observances. Gillett clarified, since this report makes no recommendations, it will be for information only and there will be no debate from the senate floor.  The report was docketed for the April 27 Senate meeting.

Academic Standards, Regulations, and Admissions Committee (ASRAC) Response to Charge S-1714 on Procedures for Adjudicating Academic Integrity Policy Infractions - Robert Schwartz and Matt Winkler, ASRAC Co-chairs

The ASRAC has been charged as follows:  

Review the current status of the educative and adjudication process and administrative organization and support of the Offices of Student Conduct regarding infractions of the University Academic Integrity Policy.  Identify areas of concern, and provide appropriate recommendations.  Including in deliberations input received on this issue form the Senate's Student Affairs Committee (Charge S-1713).

Schwartz summarized his committee's report on S-1714: Procedures for Adjudicating Academic Integrity Policy Infractions.  The Executive Committee recommended revisions to Resolution #6.

Original:
Further review is needed on Academic Integrity issues related to online courses including prevention and adjudication processes.  This evaluation should completed as a joint task between the Office of Student Conduct and ASRAC, after the full Task Force Report chaired by Dr. Sifuentes has been completed and presented to the administration.  This should be an agenda item for ASRAC in Fall 2018.

Revised:
Further review is needed on Academic Integrity issues related to online courses.  This evaluation should completed as a joint task between the Office of Student Conduct and ASRAC and SAC, after the full Task Force Report chaired by Dr. Sifuentes has been completed and presented to the administration.  This should be an agenda item for ASRAC in Fall 2018.

The Executive Committee docketed this report for the April 27 Senate meeting, pending the above revisions are made.

Ad Hoc Committee on the Sale of Alcohol in Stadiums Response to Charge S-1706 on Sale of Alcohol in Stadiums - Robert Schwartz, Ad Hoc Committee Chair

The Ad Hoc Committee on the Sale of Alcohol in Stadiums has been charged as follows:  

Consider the rationale and RUSA resolution on the potential sale of alcohol at Rutgers stadiums.  Explore this issue, and make recommendations, as appropriate.

Schwartz summarized his committee's report on S-1706: Sale of Alcohol in Stadiums.  After much discussion, Senator Adrienne Esposito, an Ad Hoc Committee on the Sale of Alcohol in Stadiums member, realized the report submitted to the Executive Secretary was not the finalized version, and many of the Executive Committee's recommendations were already implemented by the Ad Hoc Committee and in the final report.  The Executive Committee docketed this report for the April 27 Senate meeting, pending EC approval of the final report via email.  

Issues/Charges:

Proposed Charge to Executive Committee (EC) on Examining the Prevalence of the Red Scare at Rutgers University - Submitted by Viktor Krapivin

Proposed Charge: Examine the prevalence of the red scare at Rutgers University and its role in the dismissals of faculty at Rutgers. Issue appropriate recommendations on what, if any, actions the university should take to confront and address its past actions, which lead to the dismissal of faculty at the University in 1952.
Rationale:  I believe that at this time the university has demonstrated its commitment to free speech and the principle of academic freedom. The University's commitment to these ideals should be reinforced by reexamining past actions and reflecting on them as a community. For more details on the substance of the cases, please see attached minutes of the December 12th, 1952 meeting minutes of the BOT (in particular page 3 to 6, under Cases of Simon W. Heimlich and Mosos I. Finley). Additionally it may be helpful to read: Thomas F. Richards, “The Cold War at Rutgers University: A Case Study of the Dismissals of Professors Heimlich, Finley, and Glasser,” Ph. D. Dissertation, Rutgers University, 1986.

Krapivin summarized his proposed charge on Examining the Prevalence of the Red Scare at Rutgers University.  Senator Robert Boikess mentioned this might be better tied in with the many initiatives the University has currently underway in regards to academic freedom and free speech.  SVP Lee agreed and added the union might be interested in partnering in this as well.  It was determined Boikess and Lee will work together and come back to the EC on this issue at the June 8 meeting with an update.

Proposed Charge to University Structure and Governance Committee (USGC) on Senator Distribution on Standing Committees - Submitted by Viktor Krapivin

Proposed Charge:  Consider and make recommendations on how Senators are distributed to Senate Standing Committees.

Rationale:  I believe that hearing the voices of all constituencies is what makes the Senate such an important body at Rutgers University. In this sense, it is important that the voices of different classes of constituencies are heard in the various standing committees. While it may seem at this time that Senators are relatively evenly distributed between committees, there is an observable gap in the attendance of Senators from the various Senate constituencies in the committees. Perhaps the individual caucuses could help distribute Senators to committees.

Krapivin summarized his proposed charge on Senator Distribution on Standing Committees.  After discussion it was determined the caucus chairs may have more control over this issue and may be able to guide new senators better on committee preference choices.

Proposed Charge to Student Affairs Committee (SAC) on Certification of Student Senator Elections - Submitted by Viktor Krapivin

Proposed Charge:  Consider and make recommendations on how Student Senator Elections should be certified to the Senate.

Rationale: Currently, it is not exactly clear who certifies the election of Senators to the Senate from various student constituencies. I believe some schools certify the results through their deans, while other schools have staff who certify the results. For example, the Rutgers--New Brunswick School of Arts and Sciences Senators are certified by a staff member affiliated with Student Centers and Involvement. Additionally, as student elections are generally held in March and April, the necessity of a particular staff member to certify election results may result in delays. As Student Governing Associations are tasked with running their own elections, the committee should consider the role of those organizations in certifying their own election results to the Senate.

Krapivin summarized his proposed charge on Certification of Student Senator Elections.  The Executive Committee agreed when Jon Oliver mentioned this aligns with S-1605 on Size and Composition of the Senate: Reviewed and could be added to the charge.

Proposed Charge to Student Affairs Committee (SAC) on How Student Senators are Elected - Submitted by Viktor Krapivin

Proposed Charge:  Evaluate and make recommendations on how Student Senators are Elected. Consider if there should be a requirement for direct election of Senators.
Rationale: The role of the Senate is to represent the diverse views of the various students from different units within the university. While many units provide for direct election of student Senators, some SGAs appoint Senators. Other units may I believe it is important that the Student Affairs Committee consider how to best represent the views of students in the Senate and this committee is the one with the most expertise on this issue.

Krapivin summarized his proposed charge on How Student Senators are Elected.  The Executive Committee debated, and eventually agreed, this is limited to students and issued a charge to the Student Affairs Committee (SAC) with a reporting deadline of January 2019.
          
Proposed Charge to Instruction, Curricula, and Advising Committee (SAC) on Complementary Credentialing and Digital Badges for Rutgers University - Submitted by Ann Gould

Proposed Charge: Consider the feasibility of, and approach to, developing a complementary digital badging credentialing system at Rutgers University.  Examine complementary credentialing programs already in place at Rutgers.  Make appropriate recommendations, including guidelines for departments and programs.
Rationale: 

The School of Environmental and Biological Sciences is exploring the feasibility and possible implementation of competency-based complementary credentialing, including the use of digital badging.  Before moving forward, however, a University-wide conversation on the philosophy of complementary credentialing, use of credentialing elsewhere at the University, and development of guidelines for departments and programs who wish to offer these types of credentials, specifically digital badging, is needed.

Digital badges are online, verified certificates of achievement that learners earn based on specific goals, activities, and assessments.  Digital badges document transferable skills, learning, and other co-curricular experiences not apparent on the standard transcript that can be shared with employers and others.  These activities may include soft skills (e.g., communication, leadership, team work, and problem-solving), library and research skills, and field work. 

 Credentialing implies a communication conduit between Rutgers and potential employers that anticipate employer needs in hiring while providing incentives and benefits (such as expanded career opportunities and advancement) for the learner (students, employees, alumni, adult learners).  Credentialing at Rutgers should be flexible and allow for innovation and experimentation, but guidelines for departments and programs on the badging process must be robust to ensure quality and useful assessment of any badge verified and issued by this institution. 

 Currently, Credly (Credly.com) is a platform compatible with Canvas that supports the digital badging process.  This platform is quickly becoming the industry standard and has been adopted by other institutions of higher learning.  The Rutgers Division of Continuing Studies is contracting with Credly for adult learning and other activities, and use of this platform should considered in this charge.

Gould summarized her proposed charge on Complementary Credentialing and Digital Badges for Rutgers University.  The Executive Committee discussed this proposal and agreed to issue the charge to Instruction, Curricula and Advising with a reporting deadline of March 2019.

8.    New Business

Proposed Resolution by Viktor Krapivin on Standards of Accepting Excused Absences for Senate Executive Committee Meetings.

Resolved, the standards under which absences are excused from University Senate meetings shall be used for excused absence requests from the University Senate Executive Committee.

Be it further resolved, members absent from Executive Committee meetings shall be included in the minutes of the Executive Committee

Krapivin explained his rationale for the motion.  The Executive Committee voted on and passed the Senate Office changing it's reporting procedures to include non-excused absences from Executive Committee meetings.

9.    Old Business
Six-month Review of Senate Meeting Web Streaming - Ann Gould, Ad Hoc Committee on Senate Meeting Web Streaming and Senate Vice Chair Jon Oliver

The Ad Hoc Committee on Senate Meeting Web Streaming was charged as follows:  Consider the feasibility and desirability of video recording and live web streaming University Senate meetings, and archiving those video recordings online for later viewing.  Include in discussions aspects of the issues of transparency, technology, costs, benefits, audience, need, personal privacy of participants, etc.  Present both arguments both for and against the streaming and archiving.

At the April 28, 2017 meeting, the Senate adopted the committee's report and two recommendations, including:

After six months, and before recommending any future modifications to the process, the Senate Executive Committee shall review the effectiveness and practicality of web streaming and archiving, considering actual costs, any impact on Senate attendance (Senators and non-Senators), quorum, and perceived openness of Senate deliberations, and how often archived materials are accessed.  This review may involve a survey of Senators in which they are asked if they are other constituents have utilized the web streaming or archives, and if they found it useful.

Gould, Oliver, and Mickelsen summarized the details of the six-month pilot on Senate Meeting Webstreaming.  After much discussion on the successes and failures of the program, it was determined the EC will go forward with the second piece of the pilot which will involve a much wider audience and reviewing methods to streamline the voting process.  Oliver and Mickelsen will collaborate on a plan to move forward and report back to the EC.

Annual Review of All Outstanding, Pending Committee Charges:

Charges issued to committees lapse in March of the year following the year in which the charge was issued. Hardcopies of pending committee charges were distributed at the meeting, were discussed, and deadlines extended as indicated:

10.    University Senate Agenda

The April 27, 2018 Senate Meeting agenda was discussed, and will include:

11.    Adjournment
 
The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m.

Minutes written and submitted by,

Mary Mickelsen
Executive Secretary of the University Senate