Cleveland State University

Faculty Senate


I. Approval of the Agenda for the April 30, 2008 Meeting
II. Approval of the Minutes of the March 5, 2008 Meeting
Report of the Faculty Senate President
University Curriculum Committee  (Report No. 30, 2007-2008
Annual Reports
VII. Report of the President of the University
VIII. New Business

PRESENT:     Bathala, Bayachou, Beasley, Cagan, J. Dean, Doerder, Duffy,  Elkins,  Gelman, Gross, Hollinger, Inniss, S. Kaufman, Larson, Lundstrom, McNamara, Mensforth, S. Murray, Rashidi, B. Ray, H. Robertson, Rom, Sawicki, Shukla,  Silberger,  Sparks, Spicer, Steinberg, Visocky, Vonderwell, Weyman, J. Wilson (for K. O’Neill), Xu, Zhou.

Heinrich, Markovic, Nuru-Holm, Olson (for L. Patterson), M. Schwartz, Sutton, Thornton.

ABSENT:       C. Alexander, Barrow, Berlin Ray, W. Bowen, Goodell, Gorla, Lehfeldt, McCahon, Reichert, E. Rogers, Talu (for Belovich), Tebeau, Welfel, Ziolek.

Anagnostos, Bonder, Boyle, Droney, S. Emerick, Frazier, Ghorashi,
B. Green, Hanniford, E. Hill, Humer, Jeffres, Margolius, McLoughlin, Mearns, L. Mooney, Heather Nguyen, Huong Nguyen, L. E. Reed, Sadlek, M. J. Saunders, Scherer.

ALSO PRESENT:  C. C. Bowen, Hoffman, Kahana, Sheskin, M. Smith.

Senate President Sheldon Gelman called the meeting to order at approximately 3:05 P.M.

Senate President Gelman stated that he was asked to announce that there is a reception today for Dr. Jae-won Lee who is retiring after 35 years of service.  Unfortunately the reception was scheduled at the same time as our Senate meeting.  As an accommodation to Professor Lee and the School of Communication, we were asked to and we are delighted to announce that the reception will still be continuing when we are finished and it is in Parker Hannifin Hall, room 103.

I.          Approval of the Agenda for the April 30, 2008 Meeting

            Acceptance of the Agenda for the April 30, 2008 meeting was moved, seconded and approved.

II.        Approval of the Minutes of the March 5, 2008 Meeting

            Senate President Sheldon Gelman noted that the March 5, 2008 Minutes have not been prepared due to an unusual amount of work in the Senate Office.

III.       Report of the Faculty Senate President

            Senate President Gelman stated that he had a few announcements.  Some members will remember that the Senate chooses its officers each year.  This year the terms of the Senate President and the Senate Secretary are up.  The Greenbook calls for the Senate President to appoint a Nominating Committee of three elected members of the Steering Committee.  While it is arguable under the Greenbook that the members of the Nominating Committee are selected from among the members of the in-coming next year’s Steering Committee, that is impossible because we don’t know who the members of that Committee will be and no one can remember a time when the Nominating Committee was not selected from among the membership of the out-going Steering Committee.  So that is what he has done.  The Nominating Committee for next year’s officers will be chaired by Senator Joanne Belovich and the two other committee members are Senator Brian Ray and for the third consecutive year, Senator Connie Hollinger.  Senate President Gelman noted that if a member of the committee contacts any Senators to ask about possible candidates for these offices, he would encourage everyone to cooperate.  If a committee member asks Senators to suggest colleagues who might be suitable candidates, please do so.  If the committee suggests that Senators consider being candidates, he hopes members will do that as well.

            Senate President Gelman commented that last year we were actually able to apply the Greenbook procedures for the first time in years.  If the Nominating Committee produces a slate by mid to late August 2008, then there is a brief period that will be announced in which additional nominees by petition can be added to the ballot.  The procedures do not allow nominations from the floor at the first Senate meeting of the year when the election takes place.  Over the summer the rules will be made known.  He is hopeful that the Committee again will have a slate finished in time so that the Greenbook with its petition procedure can be followed.  What had happened in the past, was the Committee slate was produced late so that in fairness, we had to adjust the petition date.  Two years ago we were willing to accept petitions right up to the start of the meeting because the slate wasn’t finished.  Again, we are hoping to do better this year.

            Senate President Gelman said that since this is his last meeting, he wanted from the bottom of his heart to thank everyone for their service.  He can only say that it has been a real education.  He commented that education is a good thing.  He said that he cannot think of a single proposal that came through the Senate mechanism which was not improved by deliberation.  Many proposals of course are accepted in the form in which they are submitted and that is a credit to everybody involved including those who prepared the proposal but it does happen that at the committee level – Admissions and Standards, Curriculum – changes are discussed and he is not aware of a single instance in which a change suggested or required by a committee wasn’t truly an improvement.  He noted that when measures arrived at Steering there was not a single proposal that he thought was not improved as a result of Steering discussion.  There were rare occasions when the Senate deliberated and debated.  He felt that in each instance, the measure was improved as a result of that.  Senate President Gelman went on to say that this was a credit to everybody involved in the process as well as the geniuses who invented democracy.

            Senate President Gelman commented that everyone may notice that there are fluids around and there are some vegetables and other solids and everyone should feel free during the meeting to approach the podium without requesting permission.  It was noticed that in previous years, refreshments were unconsumed as people left directly after the meeting so it was decided that this year refreshments would be available throughout the meeting.

            Finally, Senate President Gelman reported that there was a day-long Board of Trustees Retreat two days ago.  The Deans attended.  He will leave it to President Schwartz and Provost Saunders, when she returns from Columbus, to describe some of the things that were discussed at the retreat.  There was a two-hour long demographic discussion and power point slides describing a number of high school graduates we can expect in Ohio in future years.  The situation of the State of Ohio and how Ohio compared nationally on innumerable measures, again, he will leave it to President Schwartz to discuss that.  He would just say, that everyone should believe it if the President tells us that we need to take enrollment seriously.  Having sat through the morning presentation at the Board retreat, one could not walk away without being convinced that this is an extremely serious matter.

IV.       Elections

            Senate President Gelman stated that the first item on the Agenda, really the only substantive item on the Agenda today, is elections to university committees.  As everyone should know, there are a wide variety of committees that are constituted in various ways.  Many committees are appointed according to the Greenbook by the Academic Steering Committee and the Steering Committee did that work at its last meeting.  Other committee positions are filled by election.  The Senate Secretary Lolita Inniss is going to conduct the elections.  By way of introduction, Senate President Gelman said that for each position, nominations come from the floor.  Two years ago the Senate voted not to apply general majority rule for Senate proceedings.  It was decided that in case of elections, a plurality should suffice.  This eliminates the need for run-offs of six candidates for two positions.  It could be that nobody would have a majority.  Under the rules that we have followed for the last two years, we will not conduct a run-off.  We will declare the three highest vote-getters the winners.

            Senate President Gelman noted that everyone should have a collection of ballots.  Each page of the ballot has an election described under IV on the Agenda.  If you look at the Budget and Finance Committee, for example, two names are listed.  For reasons he doesn’t quite understand, the Greenbook calls for the Steering Committee to nominate candidates for these positions, but the Steering Committee nominations are not exhaustive and additional nominations from the floor are allowed.  Everyone should also have in the meeting packet a list of colleagues who indicated a willingness to serve on various committees.  Senators may know somebody else who is willing to do so.  If members consult the list, they will find people who are willing to serve on committees.  It is important that those elected to committees be willing to serve.  If they are not willing to serve and we think that the committee is constituted but it won’t be, in the fall we will have to conduct further elections.  If enough people aren’t willing to serve, the committee won’t be able to organize itself until the fall.  Again, it is a very good thing if we have assurances that nominees are willing to serve.

            Senate President Gelman stated that Senate Vice President Jerzy Sawicki will write on the blackboard the names of those nominated.  If the number of nominees is not greater than the number of open slots, then a motion from the floor to elect by acclamation would be welcome and we wouldn’t have to go through the effort counting the ballots.  Once the ballots are turned in, Violet Lunder will perform the count.  Anybody who wants to supervise the count is welcome.  With that, Senate President Gelman turned the floor over to Lolita Buckner Inniss, the Senate Secretary.  He added that if anyone can’t hear somebody, please just say, “Louder.”

            Senate Secretary Lolita Inniss conducted the election process.

            Following formal procedures for nominating candidates for election to the various committees of the Faculty Senate and other posts, members of Senate elected the following faculty.  (Election results not announced during the meeting.)

University Faculty Affairs Committee
Two-year terms:
   Professor Gary Dyer
   Professor Constance Hollinger

Minority Affairs Committee
Two-year terms:
   Professor Heba El-Attar
   Professor Andrew Edwards
   Professor Ieda Rodrigues

Budget and Finance Committee
Two-year terms:
   Professor Brian Ray
   Professor Quingshan Tan

Board of Trustees
One-year term:
   Professor Joyce Mastboom

Board Committee on Honorary
Degrees, Citations and Recognitions
Three-year term:
Professor Albert (Fred) Smith

Copyright Review Committee
Three-year term:
  Professor Ralph Mawdsley

Patent Review Committee
Three-year term:
   Professor Yan Xu

Equal Opportunity Hearing Panel
Three-year terms:
   Professor Dena Davis
   Professor Andrew Edwards
   Professor Constance Hollinger
   Professor Theresa Holt

            There was a tie for the third position on the University Faculty Affairs Committee therefore another election for one member will take place in September.

V.        University Curriculum Committee  (Report No. 30, 2007-2008)

            Dr. Mieko Smith, chair of the University Curriculum Committee, noted that she had three items to report.  First, the UCC approved the Proposed School Nurse License Program Curriculum Change to streamline curriculum by reducing the required number of credits from 24 – 26 to 12 – 18 credit hours.  This change will make the program more marketable, bring it in-line with other Nurse Licensure programs in the area and still be within the Ohio Department of Education standards.

            Second, the UCC approved the Proposed Historic Preservation Specialization in the Master of Urban Planning Design and Development.  The Department of History has endorsed the proposal and agreed to provide history courses for the specialization.

            Third, the UCC approved the Proposed Specialization in Bilingual Education in the Curriculum and Instruction Master of Education in Literacy Development and Instruction.  This specialization is intended to primarily serve the Cleveland Metropolitan School District with bilingual classes.

            Dr. Mieko Smith said that she wanted to take this opportunity to thank the UCC members who have reviewed all items brought to the committee with a great deal of thoughtfulness and fairness.  The members of the UCC are listed in the Committee’s Annual Report.

            Senate President Sheldon Gelman personally thanked Mieko Smith for her service this year in the position of the University Curriculum Committee chair.  The position is unbelievably demanding.  If you think about the Senate Agendas and the portion of our work which comes from the UCC and then realize that probably the bulk of the work that they do never gets here, you can appreciate the effort that goes into that position.

VI.       Annual Reports

            Senate President Gelman stated that Item VI includes the Annual Reports of the Senate Committees.  Senate Committees with one or two exceptions are required to file Annual Reports.  Those that didn’t report now will be asked to report in the fall.  These are not action items.  The chairs of the committees have been asked to be present in case there are any questions.  If there are no questions or there are after the reports are discussed, we would simply receive the reports.  Senate President Gelman asked if anyone had anything to discuss on any of the reports.

  1. University Curriculum Committee  (Report No. 31, 2007-2008)
  2. Admissions and Standards Committee  (Report No. 32, 2007-2008)
  3. University Faculty Affairs Committee  (Report No. 33, 2007-2008)
  4. Minority Affairs Committee  (Report No. 34, 2007-2008)
  5. Library Committee  (Report No. 35, 2007-2008)
  6. Environmental Safety and Health Advisory Committee

(Report No. 36, 2007-2008

  1. University Petitions Committee  (Report No. 37, 2007-2008
  2. Instructional Media Services Committee  (Report No. 38, 2007-2008)

            There being no discussion, Senate President Gelman asked for a motion to receive the Annual Reports.  It was moved, seconded and the Annual Reports were received.

            Senate President Gelman reported that the Provost is in Columbus today.  She is serving on a committee that deals with state subsidy and that is why there is no report from the Provost but we do have a report from President Schwartz.

VII.     Report of the President of the University

            President Michael Schwartz stated that this has been one of the most interesting academic years watching the creation of a system of higher education.  The President of the Senate commented that there was a retreat on Monday of the Board of Trustees, the Deans and other senior officers of the University.  The first part of that retreat was a two-hour session conducted by two people from an outfit called the National Center for Educational Management Statistics (Higher Education).  They have been around forever.  Their offices are in Colorado.  They’ve probably done more about the demography of every state in the union and the people in those states.  It was important but a little frightening to hear that report.  It is the case that there is a very sharp decline at the end of the year in the number of high school graduates in the state of Ohio.  It’s also accompanied by a decline in the number of high school graduates in the surrounding states.  It’s also the case, as everyone knows, that the general population size in our region has been declining.  It’s also the case that other universities have decided that even though it comes back staring at them, they have been fishing these waters harder and harder all of the time.  You can’t drive to campus without seeing the billboards of at least a half dozen other institutions.  Of course we are doing our share of that having put up billboards in Toledo and near Bowling Green and down in Akron and there will be more of that. 

President Schwartz noted that the people from the National Center for Educational Management Statistics were putting out notice about two or three things.  One is that if we don’t begin to recruit out of this local region, out of this market, the water is becoming more and more shallow and so it becomes very important to us that we take advantage of the fact that students like to go away to school and for students more than fifty miles away from here, this is away.  We are going to have to change the way we recruit, the way we market because these are not fertile grounds as much as they were at one time.  It’s also the case that the chances of adding 230,000 new college students into the university system based on Ohio’s population demographics, and those chances are slim, but if it’s going to happen at all, it’s probably going to happen because of two things:  one, the junior colleges – community colleges – and any others because of eLearning.  That’s about the only chance in the normal course of on-campus enrollments for four-year institutions and we are not likely to see too much of that happening here.  So, given the demography, it looks to as though we are going to have to work harder but in very different ways from the ways we have been working in the past years.  That’s not impossible; it’s just more change that we have to become accustomed to.  So with everybody fishing in our market, it’s only fair that we fish in theirs and of course we just added another fisherman to the market here at Myers so there is a lot to be done.  Among other things, we are going to need more student housing.  That’s in the works – it’s being planned.  You will probably see it in 2009 and 2010 and it will most likely be across the street from where the current bookstore is and when the bookstore moves into the Student Union Building. 

President Schwartz stated that following that very interesting conversation about demography, there was a brief conversation about the new marketing plan and how it’s going.  It seems to be going pretty well and it has been well received.  Then following that, the Deans replied to the question of, “What are you doing on the health theme?” along with conversations about excellence and engagement at the university.  He commented that this was one of the more interesting sessions he has listened to especially the part of the health theme and excellence and engagement in each of the Colleges.  For his own part, he has heard about engagement now for most of this year and, as he said at the meeting, he is probably going to give an address sooner or later, which he will call “In defense of disengaged learning and memories of rainy afternoons spent in the library stacks alone.”  As a matter of fact, an experience we don’t make available to our students or even encourage enough. 

President Schwartz said that this has been an interesting academic year.  A system was being borne.  We have been told about sharply differentiated missions and centers of excellence and President Schwartz's view of that is, “Let’s wait and see how that shakes out.”  He noted that we have plenty to do here with the new GenEd and curriculum along with an enormous undertaking and it was very well done.  At the same time, the Honors Program and the Scholars Program is booming.  He said that he should point out to everyone that, in terms of athletics at this university which doesn’t have a long noble history of victory, that this year, women’s basketball went to the NCAA tournament and our men’s basketball went to the NIT tournament; volleyball went to the NCAA tournament; men’s tennis is going to the NCAA tournament; then men’s golf is going the NCAA tournament; and depending upon how things go this weekend, it could be that softball will too.  Now that is all very nice but it is more important because more than fifty percent of the student athletes at this university carried a 3.0 GPA or better average.  He will take that any day, any time.  That’s a mark of how that program is doing.  In his opinion, Lee Reed, the Athletic Director, has done a terrific job.

President Schwartz reported that within the last week or so, we have begun face to face talks about joining NEOUCOM and we are going to meet frequently until we are members of NEOUCOM.  In fact, in the long-term, he does believe that there will be a primary care physicians education program in Cleveland, probably right on this campus somehow.  We will have a medical school here called probably NEOUCOM Med Cleveland State or something like that.  That is on its way.

Lastly, President Schwartz commented that the Campaign for Cleveland, our major fund-raising campaign that we have been preparing, should begin within another couple of months at the latest, certainly by the time we are back for fall term it should be under way.  The goal will be something within $150 million and that will be a minimum for us.  These things are not easy to pull together and we are going to probably need some help from everybody here and elsewhere, but we are determined that this is a campaign that will take place and will be successful.  As everyone knows, once a campaign starts, it never ends and that’s very, very important because there isn’t going to be more State money for Cleveland State or any other institutions here beyond inflation if we see that.  So privatization began and we have no choice but to respond to it this way.  It is very important to everyone and their students and everybody else that the Campaign for Cleveland has to be effective.

Senator Allan Silberger asked President Schwartz if there has been any consideration of the question of actually bringing Myers College into Cleveland State.  What would be the advantages and disadvantages and what would be the cost of doing that?  Would we gain anything from it?

President Schwartz responded that they sold it yesterday so the point is moot.  But if it gets off the ground, and there’s all kinds of questions about whether it can, it’s a for profit private – that’s what happened to it.  Did we give any consideration to taking it and buying it?  Not much.  It is a lot of real estate but frankly we don’t need it. It’s not attached to our campus.  The main building at about East 40th and Euclid looks very nice and cosmetically it is in great shape, but structurally, he is not so sure.  We just didn’t see it in the cards for us.

Senator Andrew Gross said that he applauds the President’s and the Board’s efforts to bring student housing on the main campus and he also applauds establishing suburban branches.  Senator Gross asked President Schwartz, “How do you allocate dollars and efforts between the main campus and the suburban branches?  Do you look in the rear view mirror and base the dollar allocation on past enrollments at the main campus versus the suburban ones or are you trying to look at the former model and hope for enrollment higher at one place than the other and look at the projections and allocate dollars that way?  Which of those two models are you more comfortable with?”

President Schwartz replied that he is not much comfortable with models that look back.  Historical models made some sense to him (President Schwartz).  He wants to pay attention to them.  As somebody said to him recently, history has a vote, not a veto.  But he wants to have some sense of what we ought to be doing with those suburban sites.  We started with them almost exclusively as graduate centers.  They will probably remain heavily graduate centers, but he has been directing now that upper division, undergraduate classes will be made more available there too.  So we will add some undergraduate work that’s likely to appeal to adults who are really interested in degree completion work – not so much duplicating anything that we do normally on this campus but if people are out of school for ten and fifteen years and they never did finish their degree and they’ve got twenty, thirty, forty, and fifty hours, what they are really looking for, as far as we know, is an umbrella degree which is essentially, for example, a liberal arts degree that encompasses a number of areas.  He stated that we can do that reasonably well on this campus too, and we need to pursue that as an option.  President Schwartz added that we will keep those campuses and see if we can make it a little better in terms of what we want and not just pay attention to what’s already happened.

Senator Sanda Kaufman commented that given the demographic picture that President Schwartz has painted, she wondered if we are thinking of recruiting more international students.  President Schwartz responded, “Yes, that is part of the picture.  We haven’t done very well in the last year or two.  There has been some trouble with this.  International students have been choosing other English speaking countries as a matter of fact and the competition in New Zealand, Australia, England, and Ireland has been terrific.  So we have our work cut out for us and we will be working much harder at that too.  Overall our students are from India and China and some are from Taiwan.   There is the rest of the world too and we have really not done too terribly well in that so yes, it is a real focus for us.”

VIII.    New Business

            There being no further business, Senate President Gelman asked for a motion to adjourn.  The meeting adjourned at 4:00 P.M.

                                                            Lolita Buckner Inniss
                                                            Faculty Senate Secretary
                                                            (Minutes reviewed by Sheldon Gelman)



[Top of Page]