UNIVERSITY
SENATE
Executive
Committee
A G E
N D A
AGENDA
1. Chair’s Report - Peter Gillett,
Senate Chair
2. Secretary’s Report
- Mary Mickelsen, Executive Secretary of the Senate
3.
Administrative Report -
Barbara Lee, Senior Vice President for Academic Affairs
4.
Schedule
of Senate and Executive Committee Meetings, Academic Year 2018-19
[Revised per previous Executive Committee action.]
5. Schedule
of Agenda Item Submission Dates, Academic Year 2018-19
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"
7. Committees/Panels
Committee Reports:
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.
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.
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).
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.
Issues and Proposed 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
10.
University Senate Agenda
April
27, 2018 Senate Meetings:
- Last
meeting of AY2017-18 Senate
- First
meeting of AY2018-19 Senate (Election of Senate officers, Executive
Committee members, and board representatives)
11.
Adjournment