Intent to Raise Questions Responses to questions from October 28, 2014

AJ Bieszczad: Team Teaching  AJ asked if the process is open, if any faculty can apply from any program, what is the criteria?  The context for the question was the team teaching of courses that some faculty wanted to restore, and the Provost sounded like agreeing. That is about double counting WTUs; i.e., if there are two instructors, each of them gets 3 WTUs ( or whatever the WTU value the course have). I would like to know the rules.

G. Hutchinson, Response 1/3  Last spring, the Provost’s office committed funding for five sections of team-taught classes to be administered by the Center for Integrative Studies through the SPIRaL program ( SPIRaL has been funded in part by the W.M. Keck Foundation). Unfortunately, the very late roll out of the AY 15 budget and some other unexpected budget challenges meant that the funding for courses in the current year was not available until too late in this fall to send out a call.

2/3  Marie Francois, Interim Director of Undergraduate Studies will be sending a call for faculty to apply to develop a course following best practices in interdisciplinary teaching of undergraduate research early in the spring semester. Those faculty selected to develop an interdisciplinary course during the spring semester will receive a stipend once their work is completed. Courses developed would then be in the queue teaching inAY15/16.

3/3  Our history of team-taught courses, and support for both faculty to do so, has been fragmented. Sometimes the program has picked up the cost of the course (as well as the faculty member’s time); sometimes the Dean of the Faculty (prior to the reorganization to three schools) was able to use salary savings to fund competitive proposals for UNIV 498 courses. There is no consistent policy or practice currently in how team-teaching is assigned, who receives the funding (the program in which the ‘extra’ faculty member is housed; the School; the UNIV program); and which program will receive the FTES generated. What is consistent is that 6 WTUs for two faculty members is a resource commitment that should not be taken lightly, while recognizing that interdisciplinarity is an important part of who we are as a campus. As we engage in a strategic planning process for the Division of Academic Affairs in the spring semester, we will address this issue further.

G. Wood: Hiring across the University  G. Wood asked, in the context of 17 tenure track hires, how many people is the university hiring? And do these figures include replacements? Meaning: the 17 tenure track hires do not include replacements: if a tenure track leaves, we only grow by 16.

 See IRQ Hiring document

AJ Bieszczad: U Glen Taxes  Wouldn't it be possible to acknowledge the home owners, who collectively contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to the university by including such a list on the University pages? Even PBS ends every list of donors with a phrase "...and the viewers like you."

Response: Y. Trinidad & N. Ipach  1) See Academic Senate Response to Special Tax (Trinidad, VP of Business & Finance)  From N. Ipach, VP of Advancement:  We recognize philanthropic gifts, grants, and corporate sponsorships made to the CSU Channel Islands Foundation according to the CASE reporting standards as well as the guidelines for the VSE (voluntary support of education) report. Unfortunately taxes, including the mello roos or any other type, do not qualify under CASE or VSE reporting.  If it is a simple acknowledgement of these payments, I’m not sure Advancement is the right place for this to come from as we deal with donors and philanthropy, but I can look into it more as for U Glen housing might make sense.

M. Adler: online RTP  What the possibility is for the University to move to a secure, online format for RTP submission and review?

B. Hartung, Resposnse  The recently ratified CBA gives campuses the option to compile and review the contents of the Working Personnel Action File (WPAF) in an electronic format, pursuant to campus policy (Article 15.8). This frees the campus to pilot an electronic WPAF option in the RTP cycle. Faculty Affairs will be looking at different options already in use in the CSU system as well as the possibilities of using those learning management systems we already own. Beth Hartung, Interim Assistant Provost

J. Meriwether: self-sustaining Institutes  1) are any State/General Funds being used to support these Institutes (salaries/benefits, operating expenses, etc), and if so what is the amount (in the current year and the cumulative total)?  2) what is the amount in the CISB Endowment, and how much has been raised by IGER?

Response: W. Cordiero, AVP From State/General Funds AnnualCumulative to Date IGER Salary/Benefits$117,000 + benefits$270,614 + benefits IGER Operating Expenses $0 CISB$0 CISB Endowment: $0 CISB Grants Received: $600,000 IGER Funds Raised: $250,000 from Smith Foundation $78,500 from outside sources (e.g. Wells Fargo)