PM 89-01 Coordination of Gift Solicitation and Acceptance       (Superseded by PM 90-01)

PM 89-02 Guidelines for the Academic Calendar (Supersedes PM 86-01)

PM 89-03 Campus Administrative Review       (Superseded by PM 90-08)

PM 89-04 Guidelines for Search Committees for Full-Time Academic and Administrator III and IV Positions (Supersedes PM 85-07 and Amendment)  See also: PM 98-07 for additions to Amendment

PM 89-05 Two-Year Appointments for New Probationary Faculty

PM 89-06 [not issued]

PM 89-07 University Energy Conservation Policy (Supersedes PM 86-03)

PM 89-08 Summary of Reappointment, Tenure, Promotion (RTP) Policies and Procedures for 1989-90 (Supersedes PM 88-07)        (Superseded by PM 90-11)

PM 89-09 Annual Review of Courses

PM 89-10 Staff Handbook

PM 89-11 Suspension of the Collection and Distribution of PTE Norming Data 

PM 89-12 Supplemental RTP Guidelines for Statewide Nursing Program Faculty Coordinators

PM 89-13 Special Visitors to the University

PM 89-14 Grading Policy

PM 89-15 Membership on Faculty Laeves and Honors Committee (Supersedes PM 83-17)

PM 89-16 School of Education Name Change

PM 89-17 Timetable for Recommending Department Chairs

PM 89-18 Establishment of Commission on Student Publications

PM 89-19 Policy and Procedures for Dealing with and Reporting Possible Misconduct in Science

To: University Administrative Council
Date: Mar. 7, 1989
Academic Senate Executive Committee
PM 89-02 (Supersedes PM 86-01)
From: John A. Brownell, President
Subject: Guidelines for the Academic Calendar

The following guidelines are promulgated for the development of academic calendars for CSU Dominguez Hills. In accord with the Academic Senate Resolution EPC 87-28, we have been following these guidelines since the beginning of the 1988-89 year.

 Responsibility for the development of the academic calendar is assigned to the University Registrar and responsibility for approval of academic calendars is that of the Vice President, Academic Affairs. The Academic Senate will review the calendar in a timely manner to react to pedagogical concerns to be reflected in the final calendar.

 It shall be the practice of the university to maintain academic calendars at least two years ahead in order that members of the faculty and others may plan their schedules accordingly. Each year, in October, a calendar is to be developed for the second year hence, thus maintaining a capability for planning.

 The academic calendar for CSU Dominguez Hills shall be developed in conformance with The California State University policies and procedures (Academic Affairs memorandum 79-08/Faculty and Staff Affairs memorandum 79-20) and with primary attention to the educational needs of students. The Statewide Nursing Program, which is still in the process of transition from self-support to state-support and from consortium-based status to campus-based status, will not be subject to these guidelines in their entirety, pending completion of study of the pedagogical differences inherent in the needs of that off-campus program from regular campus programs and the completion of discussions with appropriate CSU system authorities. It shall be the responsibility of the University Registrar to devise the university's academic calendar which is consistent with system policy and the university principles listed below.

The academic calendar for CSU Dominguez Hills will, to the maximum

extent practicable, conform to the following principles:

1. As mandated by state policy, "The typical academic year shall consist of 147 instructional days. From year to year . . . a variation of plus or minus two days is permissible." This is exclusive of Saturdays and Sundays and the final examination period.

2. The academic calendar shall have an equal number of instructional weeks in each semester. Instructional days shall be evenly distributed across the week.

3. A final examination period shall be scheduled within seven consecutive days. The day of the final examination shall be a day of the week on which the class is scheduled.

4. For fall semester, instruction shall begin as close to Labor Day as possible. The last day of final examinations shall be no later than four days before Christmas.

5. The spring semester shall begin in late January and be so configured that the final examination period will end before Memorial Day.

6. There shall be a Monday-through-Saturday spring recess, normally falling in the week preceding Easter Sunday.

7. The final date to add classes and the final date for late registration shall be the second Friday of instruction.

Due to the fluctuation of specific dates and therefore, the fluctuating coincident days of the week declared as legal holidays, it may become necessary to alter the specific academic calendar within any given calendar year. It shall therefore, be the responsibility of the Vice President, Academic Affairs, to review and approve the proposed academic calendar as being substantially in conformance with the above principles.

To: Campus Community
Date: July 27, 1989
PM 89-04   Supersedes PM 85-07 and Amendment and PM-86-08
From: John A. Brownell, President
Subject: Guidelines for Search Committees for Full-Time Academic and Administrator III and IV Positions

PM 89-04 establishes within the context of the annually reaffirmed University Policy Statement of Non-Discrimination and Affirmative Action, guidelines for the establishment of faculty and administrative search committees. The intent of the guidelines is to ensure effective committee operations and appropriate participation of historically under-represented groups (ethnic minorities, women, and persons with disabilities) on such committees.

These guidelines have been reviewed by the Faculty Personnel Policy Committee, the Academic Senate, the Council of Instructional Deans, and circulated to the members of the University Administrative Council for comment.

Guidelines

Search committees are required for the hiring of all tenure-track faculty, full-time lecturers, and Administrators III and rv. The following guidelines govern the selection process for these positions.

Full-time Academic Appointments

In accord with the stipulations of the Unit III Bargaining Unit contract (12.11,12.15, and 12.17):

1. Each department or equivalent unit shall elect a peer committee of tenured employees for the purpose of reviewing and recommending appointments. Faculty search committees may elect tenured faculty members from outside the department. (Cf. 12.11)

2. Normally, the department or equivalent unit shall develop faculty vacancy announcements. Such announcements shall be subject to approval by the Dean or other appropriate appointment officer. (Cf. 12.17)

3. All tenure-track faculty positions shall be publicized nationally. (Cf. 12.15) These positions should be announced in publications that call the position to the attention of the largest number of qualified persons, including historically under-represented persons.

4. Searches for full-time lecturers must be advertised, whether nationally, regionally, or locally is at the discretion of the school dean. Full-time lecturers appointed after a search may, after having been reviewed through the RTP process, be appointed for a second year without an additional search. After such an appointment of a full-time lecturer to a second year, another search must be held. (Only for the most compelling reason may the Affirmative Action Officer approve an exemption by permitting appointment of a lecturer to a third year without a new search.)

5. Position announcements should be mailed before the date of the publication of any advertisement. Position announcements must be circulated to organizations interested in assisting in hiring members of historically under-represented groups.

6. Committee business shall not be conducted unless a majority of the members is present. Each committee member shall participate in the preliminary screening of the applications or nominations. During interviewing and formulating recommendations, the full membership must be present. The only exception is that interviews may be audio and/or video tape-recorded in instances when a committee member is unable to participate; such an exception must have the prior approval of the Affirmative Action Officer. (The absent committee member must then listen to the tape of the interview before participating in the recommendation process.)

7. It is the responsibility of the chair of the committee in conjunction with the Dean, to ensure that applicants are informed of their status at significant points in the process; for example, at the point when applicants are no longer under consideration.

8. Unless there are compelling reasons, no fewer than three qualified finalists will be recommended to the appointing officer (President, Vice President, Chief Fiscal Officer, or Dean). A cover memorandum that lists the strengths and weaknesses of each final candidate should accompany this recommendation.

Full-time Administrator III and IV Appointments

1. Search committees shall include at least three and, preferably, five or more members. Committees should include appropriate participation of historically under-represented groups (ethnic minorities, women, and persons with disabilities). If the selection process used to appoint search committee members does not generate representation by these groups, the appointment authority (President, Vice President, Chief Fiscal Officer, or Dean) should augment the committee membership to achieve balance.

2. At least one person on each search committee should be from a unit other than the unit in which the successful candidate will be serving.

3. Administrator III and IV positions shall be publicized nationally. These positions should be announced in publications that call the position to the attention of the largest number of qualified persons, including historically - under-represented persons.

4. The content of the position announcement is the responsibility of the appointing officer (President, Vice President, Chief Fiscal Officer, or Dean) for administrator searches.

5. Position announcements should be mailed before the date of the publication of any advertisement. Position announcements must be circulated to organizations interested in assisting in hiring members of historically under-represented groups.

6. Committee business shall not be conducted unless a majority of the members is present. Each committee member shall participate in the preliminary screening of the applications or nominations. During interviewing and formulating recommendations, the full membership must be present. The only exception is that interviews may be audio and or video tape-recorded in instances when a committee member is unable to participate; such an exception must have the prior approval of the Affirmative Action Officer. (The absent committee member must then listen to the tape of the interview before participating in the recommendation process.)

 
7. It is the responsibility of the chair of the committee in conjunction with the appointment officer to ensure that applicants are informed of their status at significant points in the process; for example, at the point when applicants are no longer under consideration.

 
8. Unless there are compelling reasons, no fewer than three qualified finalists will be recommended to the appointing officer (President, Vice President, Chief Fiscal Officer, or Dean). A cover memorandum that lists the strengths and weaknesses of each final candidate should accompany this recommendation.

 
9. If a finalist in the applicant pool requests academic departmental retreat rights, it is the responsibility of the chair of the committee to notify the VPAA, the Dean and the department in advance of the candidate's visit to campus, furnish a copy of the candidate's curriculum vitae, and arrange an appropriate time to meet with department representatives during the campus visit and obtain a recommendation from the VPAA, the Dean, and the department.

California State University, Dominguez Hills is committed to recruiting and hiring highly qualified individuals. In this context, we are dedicated to increasing the employment of individuals from historically under-represented groups. All participants in the search process are encouraged to help achieve this end.

To: Campus Community
Date: January 11, 1990
PM 89C-04   (Amendment  no. 1)
From: Robert C. Detweiler, President
Subject: Guidelines for Search Committees for Full-Time Academic and Administrator III and IV Positions

 Upon the recommendation of the Academic Senate (FPC 89-21), I am pleased to approve the following policy on the appointment of administrators to academic departments. The policy, which is effective immediately, replaces guideline number nine in the "Full-time Administrator III and IV Appointments" section on page three of PM 89-04.

9. It is the responsibility of the Dean of Faculty Affairs, the Vice President of Academic Affairs, and the appropriate academic dean to ensure that procedures are set up for a departmental review of any administrative candidate in the final pool who requests an academic appointment. These administrators must notify the department chair at least two weeks in advance of the candidate's visit to campus, furnish the department with a copy of the candidate's curriculum vitae, and ensure that the candidate's schedule permits adequate time with the department or its elected representatives. If an administrative search is conducted during the summer or winter break and the faculty of the department concerned are not available, the President should withhold the conferring of an academic appointment until after the regular semester begins and the department has had adequate time to review the candidate and forward its recommendation to him or her.

The appropriate department will review the administrative candidate and recommend for or against appointment, and for or against tenure. The department should also recommend the rank of appointment. In making the recommendation, the department should consider the qualifications of the candidate to teach specific courses in the department, the candidate's previous academic appointments and academic rank, and the candidate's scholarly achievements. The granting of tenure at the rank of full professor should not be done routinely; and the recommendation should be based on both the candidate's demonstrated abilities and fit with the academic program in the department.

The University, when possible, shall provide an additional faculty position, for a minimum of two years, to any department that is required to absorb an administrator.

In the event the President does not follow the department's recommendation on administrative appointment and tenure, the or she should meet with the department before the appointment is announced to explain the reasons for the decision.

To: General Faculty
Date: May 8, 1989
PM 89-05
From: John A. Brownell, President
Subject: Two Year Appointments for New Probationary Faculty

Based upon the recommendation (FPC 89-03) of the Academic Senate, I am pleased to approve the following policy for the appointment of new, full-time, tenure-track faculty. The purpose of the policy, which is effective immediately, is to ameliorate the situation of new faculty, who at present must prepare in September, within a few weeks of being appointed, for a full-scale performance evaluation. The policy is also intended to provide the RTP reviewers of the new faculty with more information upon which to base their evaluations.

The initial probationary appointment of a full-time faculty member shall normally be for a period of two years. During the first year of service, faculty members will normally be evaluated during the semester following their first semester of teaching. The review will occur, when possible, after student PTE evaluations have been collected and analyzed.

Appointments Beginning with the Fall Semester

In their first year, faculty members whose appointments begin in the Fall Semester will be reviewed during the Spring Semester through the Periodic Evaluation process outlined in Article 15 of the Unit Three Agreement and according to the process and timeline currently used for the review of fulltime lecturers. That is, the faculty member will be evaluated by the department chair, the department RTP committee, the school RTP committee, and the school dean. In subsequent years, the faculty will be evaluated through the normal RTP performance review process by the department chair, the department RTP committee, the school dean, the school RTP committee, the University RTP Committee, the Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President.

Appointments Beginning with the Spring Semester

The policy outlined above shall not apply to faculty whose appointments begin in the Spring Semester. The first evaluation of these faculty will take place during the subsequent Fall Semester through the regular RTP performance review process.

Appointment of Full-time Lecturers with Previous Service

The policy is also not applicable to new probationary faculty who have been employed as full-time lecturers at Dominguez Hills for two or more years without a break in full-time service. These faculty will be subject upon appointment to review through the normal RTP performance review process.

To: Campus Community
Date: July 27, 1989
PM 89-07  Supersedes PM 82-34
From: John A. Brownell, President
Subject: University Energy Conservation Policy

Over the past five years the University has made substantial gains toward achieving our goal of a 15% reduction in consumption of energy. These reductions were made possible through the efforts of the entire campus community, as well as a number of energy conservation projects funded by the Chancellor's Office. I take this opportunity to thank each of you who have participated in this substantial savings for the State of California and ask your help in continuing this very worthwhile endeavor. With everyone's cooperation, it is possible to substantially reduce our present usage even more.

Chancellor Reynolds has recently issued an Executive Order (Executive Order 538) titled "Policy Statement on Energy Conservation and Utilities Management for The California State University and Energy Consumption Goal for 1992/93 Compared to 1986/87." The policies and procedures contained in this executive order were formulated after extensive consultation with members of The California State University Academic Senate and campus facilities personnel, and subsequently adopted by the Board of Trustees. As the Chancellor has delegated responsibility for implementing this executive order to each campus president, I present to you the campus policy on energy conservation and ask for your compliance for the following three fundamental reasons: (a) to conserve limited natural resources; (b) to conserve and manage scarce financial resources; and (c) to meet our obligation as concerned and responsible citizens.

Also attached is a list of energy conservation suggestions useful both at work and at home.

I am asking each member of the campus community to cooperate in this effort, knowing that your participation will be fully appreciated.

The Federal Emergency Building temperature restrictions regulations, effective as of July 16,1979, place restrictions on temperatures for heating, cooling and domestic hot water in commercial, industrial, government and other nonresidential buildings. The regulations generally require the thermostat be set no lower than 78E Fahrenheit for cooling, no higher than 68E Fahrenheit for heating and no higher than 115E Fahrenheit for domestic hot water. The regulations also require room temperature set backs during periods when buildings are unoccupied. In response to these regulations and other continuing State and CSU mandates to conserve energy the following guidelines for building temperature control will be followed in all CSUDH buildings:

1. People should expect temperatures which are regularly between 68E Fahrenheit and 78E Fahrenheit and dress accordingly.

2. Personnel working or teaching in rooms which are regularly colder than 68E Fahrenheit , hotter than 78E Fahrenheit, or who have chronic problems with drafts or stagnant air should report it, in writing, to Physical Plant. Physical Plant will attempt to adjust the air conditioning or make other modifications to correct the problem.

3. No space heaters, whether state owned or personal property, will be authorized for campus use unless a statement, approved by Physical Plant, is on file in the Physical Plant Office indicating that such equipment is necessary to maintain a temperature of 68E Fahrenheit.

4. In accordance with Department of Energy Regulations, heating and air conditioning systems must be turned off while buildings are unoccupied. This is normally between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m., Monday through Friday and all hours of Saturday, Sunday and holidays. Exceptions to these regulations should be requested, in writing, by the cognizant administrator and forwarded to the Director of Physical Plant.

5. All windows in buildings that are air conditioned will remain closed and as secure as possible to prevent loss of conditioned air.

6. Use of refrigerators for non-instructional purposes should be consistent with good energy management practices. In order to discourage proliferation of personal refrigerators, approval for operation of such must be obtained from the Director of Physical Plant.

7. Exemptions to this policy include, but are not limited to, maintaining laboratory plants or animal life; operation of data processing or other equipment which is temperature sensitive; storage of food or other perishables; and preservation of archives, books, art works or specimen. Written request for exemptions should be sent by the cognizant administrator to the Director of Physical Plant.

We realize that implementation of the attached building temperature control policy will change environmental and physical comfort conditions in many, if not all, of the buildings on campus. Physical Plant will respond as quickly as possible to adjust air conditioning and heating systems which are not providing temperatures within the 68E Fahrenheit to 78E Fahrenheit restrictions mandated by the Federal Department of Energy Regulations. In most buildings heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems were not designed to accommodate these temperature restrictions. This is further complicated by numerous changes in building space and room usage over the years, making it almost impossible to maintain original design conditions. We hope all members of the campus community will cooperate as together we endeavor to achieve and maintain the goals of the Federal Building Temperatures Regulations.

1. Artificial lighting is to be used only when natural light is insufficient to perform the required function, or where the safety of the campus community is compromised.

2. When artificial lighting is required, the following standard guidelines are to be followed:

          A. Use the minimum amount of light required to perform the required tasks comfortably. The attached table indicates the desired level of illuminance that the University will attempt to provide.

Physical Plant will consult with facility users in the adjustment of lighting levels.

          B. Purely decorative lighting will be eliminated. Lighting for special events will be approved on an event-by-event basis.

          C. Artificial lighting will be used only when areas are occupied. Whenever a room is unoccupied, the lights are to be switched off. This practice should be followed even if the room is unoccupied only for a few minutes.

          D. When specifying new light fixtures and lamps, care will be taken to order the most energy efficient light source appropriate for the intended application.

It should be noted that energy efficient lighting should not detract from the esthetics value currently provided by lighting throughout the University. In most instances, it will be possible to provide more energy efficient lighting that also provides better quality illumination.

Don't let soaring energy costs leave you feeling frustrated or helpless. There are many things you can do to conserve energy and lower utility bills.

TURN OFF LIGHTS, INCLUDING FLUORESCENTS WHENEVER........

-An office or a room is unoccupied.

-You leave an area for more in than five minutes.

-Natural light entering the room is sufficient to perform tasks.

MAXIMIZE THE USE OF OVERHEAD and NATURAL LIGHTING

by arranging work stations in areas where light levels are highest.

WHEN LEAVING A BUILDING,

if you see a light on in an unoccupied space, switch it off.

DON'T LEAVE ENERGY CONSUMING LIGHTS and EQUIPMENT

on when you leave assuming someone else will turn them off.   No One else is likely to do so.

KEEP A LIGHT SWEATER OR JACKET

in your office to stay comfortable during building temperature fluctuations.

CONSOLIDATE THE USE OF REFRIGERATORS.

Full refrigerators use less energy than empty ones.

MINIMIZE THE USE OF ENERGY USING (heat producing) DEVICES

to keep your area cooler, this includes lights. The majority of energy used in lighting is converted to heat. For example, 79% of the energy consumed by a fluorescent tube is converted to heat.

OPEN YOUR DRAPES OR BLINDS

in sumer months to allow the building to reradiate the heat during the night.

CLOSE YOUR DRAPES OR BLINDS

in the winter to assist the building in retaining heat during the night

OPEN BLINDS IN COOL WEATHER

only when the sun is shining into your room

AVOID THE USE OF PORTABLE FANS AND SPACE HEATERS

CLOSE BLINDS IN HOT WEATHER

to reduce the heat gain during the day and open them at night to reradiate building heat outside.

OPERATE AUTOCLAVES, STERILIZERS and KILNS

only when filled to their proper capacity.

USE DISTILLED WATER SPARINGLY

Distillation units consume large amounts of water.

TURN OFF ENERGY CONSUMING EQUIPMENT

such as typewriters, copiers, calculators and coffeepots whenever they're not in use.

KEEP ALL AIR VENTS FREE FROM BLOCKAGE

ALL WINDOWS and OUTSIDE DOORS

should be kept closed to retain conditioned air.

If you have any questions, comments, or energy saving ideas, please call Physical Plant, extension 3804.

To: Campus Community
Date: July 26, 1989
PM 89-09
From: John A. Brownell, President
Subject: Annual Review of Courses

PM 89-09 establishes a policy and procedure for the annual review of courses by the faculty. The recommendations of the faculty will be reviewed by the school dean and sent to the University Curriculum Committee which will recommend to the Vice President of Academic Affairs. The frequency with which courses are offered will be indicated in the university catalog and in the schedule of courses.

This policy and procedure has been reviewed by the University Curriculum Committee, the Council of Instructional Deans, the Educational Policies Committee, and the Academic Senate.

RATIONALE

In the interests of presenting accurate and current academic program information to students, the faculty will annually review the courses offered by their departments. Because the removal of courses from the catalog may impact programs outside the responsible department, there will be a university-wide review of the courses deleted to assess the impact of the deletions on all academic programs.

PROCESS

Each Fall term the Academic Affairs office will compile a list of courses showing the frequency of offering over the immediate past two consecutive years and the course enrollment figures. Unused courses will be listed separately. These courses are defined is courses which either have not been offered for the past two consecutive years or longer or when offered were canceled. These lists will be sent to the deans to assist the faculty in their determinations.

A. Departments will be asked to determine the term frequency of each course for inclusion in their list of courses in the university catalog and the schedule of classes (e.g. Fall and/or Spring; every other year Fall and/or Spring).

B.    Departments will be asked to examine unused courses and to respond in one of the following ways:

1. Present a justification for keeping an unused course in the university catalog. (Courses allowed to remain in the university catalog will be re-reviewed in the next cycle.)

2. Place unused courses in "deep freeze" (i.e. retain in course catalog file but remove from university catalog).

For a course to be removed from the "deep freeze" the department will send a request to reinstate the course to the school dean who will send it to the University Curriculum Committee for review and recommendation to the Vice President of Academic Affairs.

 3. Request deletion of the course. These courses will be removed from the university catalog and deleted (retired) from the course catalog file.

To: Campus Community
Date: Sept. 11, 1989
PM 89-10
From: Robert C. Detweiler, President
Subject: Staff Handbook

I am pleased to announce the publication of the Staff Handbook which is designed to provide information on the basic policies and procedures which guide the administrative routines of the University. The Handbook is divided into seven sections including (l) Administrative and Staff Personnel Procedures; (2) Buildings, Equipment, and Grounds Procedures; (3) Office Procedures; (4) Financial Procedures; (5) Student Services Procedures; (6) Health and Safety Procedures; and (7) Support Services Procedures. The volume also provides an Introduction and a Subject Index. A few copies are now being circulated for comment before the final editing is done and the publication is printed for general distribution and reference.

The purpose of this Presidential Memorandum is to confirm institutional acceptance of the Handbook and to enlist the participation of everyone who uses it in the refinement process which will make it increasingly valuable as it is amended and augmented to meet University needs.

A publication of this kind is never finished; that is why it will be issued in loose-leaf form. Staff responsibility for coordinating the process of updating the Handbook periodically rests with the Vice President for Administration. Each individual who will be in possession of a copy is charged with the responsibility of updating the volume each time amendments and extensions of the contents are distributed. An amendment record will be included in the Introduction.

The compilation of a policy and procedures handbook is an important accomplishment and we expect it to provide additional structure in the organization, to reduce ambiguity, and to increase efficiency.

To: All Full-Time Faculty
Date: August 21, 1989
PM 89-11
From: Robert C. Detweiler, President
Subject: Suspension of the Collection and Distribution of PTE Norming Data. (Rescinds portions of PM 84-11)

I have reviewed the policy, EPC 88-21, proposed by the Academic Senate concerning the Perceived Teaching Effectiveness (PTE) norming data and have consulted about this matter with the Vice President for Academic Affairs and the Council of Instructional Deans. Because of the widely disparate views expressed about the use of frequency counts as an alternative to the existing norming data, I am not approving this proposal as campus policy.

It is my hope that a compromise policy will be developed during the 1989-1990 academic year. In the meantime, I am suspending the collection and distribution of PTE norming data for 1989-1990. Therefore, I am also rescinding the portions of PM 84-11 that address the norming data.

To: All Full-Time Faculty
Date: August 18, 1989
PM 89-12
From: Robert C. Detweiler, President
Subject: Supplemental RTP Guidelines for Statewide Nursing Program Faculty Coordinators (Interim Policy)

Upon the recommendation of the Academic Senate, the Dean of Professional Health Programs, and the Vice President for Academic Affairs, I am pleased to approve the following RTP evaluation guidelines for the Faculty Coordinators of the Statewide Nursing Program. The guidelines are to be used beginning with the 19891990 RTP process. During the coming year, the guidelines will be reviewed and revised as appropriate.

 Overview

 Many of the responsibilities for the Statewide Nursing Program (SNP) Faculty Coordinators are similar to the responsibilities of non-nursing campus faculty members. Both groups offer a valuable service in teaching, scholarship, and community service. However, due to the non-traditional nature of the Statewide Nursing Program delivery system, the Faculty Coordinator's role encompasses a number of unique differences. A primary example is the Faculty Coordinator's workload, which is divided in a diverse pattern that typically incorporates 40 percent (6 units) for teaching and 20 percent (3 units) for scholarship and service, and 40 percent (6 units) for coordination of the program. These percentages may vary at times, whereby the coordinating responsibilities may be greater than the teaching responsibilities. For this reason, the retention, tenure, and promotion of Faculty Coordinators should be based not only on teaching, scholarship, and community service, but also on the Statewide Nursing Program coordinating activities.

The Faculty Coordinator is the University's frontline academic representative for an assigned geographic area that is often hundreds of miles from the Dominguez Hills campus. Each area may have approximately 400 enrolled students. The Associate Coordinators are part-time faculty members who work collaboratively with the Faculty Coordinators. The number of Associate Coordinators varies from area to area and is dependent upon the density of the student population and the square miles of each area.

I. Coordination Responsibilities

The Faculty Coordinator:

(l) Recommends course offerings to the program directors in his or her region. These recommendations take into account the distribution of the students; the availability of space and faculty; and the traffic patterns, road conditions, and typical weather patterns of the area.

(2) Recruits, orients, and advises graduate or undergraduate students, or both. Some coordinators are assigned advisement responsibility for particular programs such as the Public Health Nursing Certificate Program, the Quality Assurance Certificate Program, and Colloquia.

(3) Establishes and maintains good relationships between the University and affiliating hospitals, community colleges, and other agencies and institutions.

(4) Collaborates with one or more of the Associate Coordinators in providing academic advisement and monitors the quality of the academic advisement provided by the Associate Coordinators.

(5) Supervises a secretary and is responsible for monitoring an operating expense budget.

(6) Seeks out and recommends potential part-time faculty, provides orientation for new faculty members, and is responsible for program monitoring to ensure conformity with professional accreditation standards in order to maintain quality control.

II. Teaching

Professional accreditation by the National League for Nursing requires that the nursing program be identical in course content, support materials, outcome objectives, and student evaluation criteria at all sites throughout the state. The program is competency based; and performance expectations must be explicit and objective.

The constraints described above determine the instructional procedures in the Statewide Nursing Program. Course delivery methods are different from the delivery methods used in traditional university classrooms, because SNP clinical and theory courses are typically taught in modules (mini-courses) of one or two units, and students are graded on each module. Course materials include an SNP-developed workbook or comprehensive syllabus that conforms to the program curricula and accreditation requirements.

Course materials are carefully constructed to recognize the special needs of the adult learner and to promote self-directed learning, critical thinking, and skill in written and oral presentation. Instructional materials are produced and constantly revised by the Statewide Nursing Program faculty. These materials include workbooks, syllabi, audiotapes, videotapes, computer programs, examinations, and instructor guides.

Audio-visual materials developed through the collaborative efforts of Statewide Nursing Program faculty are available to students in Learning Resource Centers, which are located at various affiliating institutions. The periodic updating and revising of these materials is an assigned responsibility shared by all tenure-track SNP faculty. This process, which is ongoing, involves the collation of course evaluation data from instructors and students, revisions to maximize teaching effectiveness and maintain currency, and dissemination of the revised material.

Evidence of teaching performance can be documented through the results of the Perceived Teaching Effectiveness (PTE) evaluation and the samples of the module materials that the faculty member has written or helped develop.

III. Advisement

The Faculty Coordinator is directly responsible for the academic advisement of a substantial number of graduate and undergraduate students. The Faculty Coordinator is also responsible for the quality of advisement provided by the Associate Coordinators of the area. Academic advisement for the students, who are all Registered Nurses, is complex, because all the SNP students have attended other colleges; and many of them require extensive counseling on multiple course substitutions and the assessment options.

Evidence of advisement responsibilities may include published lists of advisement times; program dates and locations of class schedules; office hour listings; evaluations of the performance of the Faculty Coordinator by the Associate Coordinators and by the students the or she has advised.

IV. Scholarship

Evidence of scholarly activity for Faculty Coordinators shall be the same as for other university faculty.

V. Community Service

Evidence of community activity for Faculty Coordinators shall be the same as for other university faculty.

EVALUATION INSTRUMENT OF FACULTY COORDINATOR

Directions:

To assist the University in its retention, tenure and promotion considerations, your thoughtful feedback regarding the performance of your Faculty Coordinator is solicited. Therefore, you are asked to respond to the following items which reflect key aspects of the faculty coordinator's role in which the associate coordinator can provide first-hand information.

Please rate your Faculty Coordinator on a 5 point scale. If you do not have knowledge of a particular item use the NA (not applicable designation.)

Faculty Coordinator _______________________________ Area _____________Date _____________

__________________________________

Signature (Optional)

To: Campus Community
Date: Sept. 1, 1989
PM 89-13
From: Robert C. Detweiler, President
Subject: Special Visitors to the University

It is the desire of the University to recognize and accommodate special visitors to the campus. (A visitor requiring special handling by the University is defined as one who, by his/her very presence on campus, may be expected to attract special attention to the University.)

Any individual on campus who believes that a visitor may attract such attention should contact the Office of Development and University Relations. The Development and University Relations office will notify the President's Office and, if requested, will assist in making whatever arrangements might be necessary to provide an appropriate environment for the visit.

In order to provide maximum assistance, the Office of Development and University Relations needs to be notified of special visitors at least ten working days prior to the visit.

To: Campus Community
Date: Sept. 20, 1989
PM 89-14  Supersedes PM 77-27
From: Robert C. Detweiler, President
Subject: Grading Policy

Upon the recommendation of the Academic Senate, effective fall 1990, the campus will convert from the current grading system (A, AB, B, BC, C, CD, D, F) to the plus/minus grading system (A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-, D+, D, F). This will facilitate the equitable computation of grade points for transfer students.

2. The repeat and cancel policy is available only for grades of C- and below.

3. The lowest passing grade is "D."

To: Instructional Deans, Academic Senate Chair
Date: October 2, 1989
PM 89-15  Suoersedes PM 83-17
From: Robert C. Detweiler, President
Subject: Membership on Faculty Leaves and Honors Committee

By this memorandum, I am formally rescinding the policy contained in PM 83-17 concerning the membership on the Faculty Leaves and Honors Committee. Organizational changes since 1983 have made provisions of the PM outdated. The statement below reflects the current organizational structure; it conforms with sections 27.5 and 28.7 of the Unit Three Agreement; and it ensures representation for the faculty of the Statewide Nursing Program.

The policy on membership on the Faculty Leaves and Honors Committee shall be as follows.

One tenured, Unit Three faculty member shall be elected annually from each school or equivalent unit to serve on the Faculty Leaves and Honors Committee. Faculty who are candidates for leaves and honors shall not be elected to the committee.

To ensure continuity, one member shall be held over for an additional year. It is the chair of the committee who shall be the holdover member; and no member shall be elected from his or her school or unit. In the event that the chair is unable or unwilling to serve, the committee shall elect another member to serve as the holdover member.

To: Campus Community
Date: October 10, 1989
PM 89-16
From: Robert C. Detweiler, President
Subject:  School of Education Name Change

Upon the recommendation of the faculty of the Center for Quality Education and the concurrence of the Academic Senate, the name of that unit is restored to the School of Education. This name change is effective immediately.

To: All Full Time Faculty
Date: November 15, 1989
PM 89-17
From: Robert C. Detweiler, President
Subject: Timetable for Recommending Department Chairs (Supersedes portions of PM 78-15)

Upon the recommendation of the Academic Senate (resolution FPC 89-19), I am pleased to approve the following policy concerning the timetable for the process of recommending department chairs. This timetable replaces the one specified in PM 78-15.

 Each department shall establish a timetable for the process of recommending candidates for department chair. Recommendations may be made at any time during the academic year, providing that the departmental nomination process is concluded by the eleventh week of the spring semester of the academic year preceding the year in which the chair is to assume office.

To: Campus Community
Date: December 6, 1989
PM 89-18
From: Robert C. Detweiler, President
Subject: Establishment of Commission on Student Publications

Following consultation within the University, I am acting on the recommendation of an Ad Hoc Committee on Student Publications to establish a permanent university-wide Commission on Student Publications. The following definitions and responsibilities governing the operations of the Commission are effective immediately.

A. Definitions

The term "Commission" refers to that appointed body responsible for budget management and policy administration for the campus student newspaper and general oversight of all other student publications.

The term "Student Publications" refers to all printed publications, such as newspapers, magazines, and/or journals generated by students and receiving financial support from the University, and circulated on and/or off campus, as representing CSU Dominguez Hills.

B. Functions and Responsibilities of the Commission on Student Publications

The Commission, which operates under delegated authority from the President of the University, is the publisher for all student publications, either existing or which may be established while this memo remains in effect. The Commission shall not itself have editorial responsibility, but may within the established canons of journalism determine those groups or individuals who shall exercise such responsibility. Its responsibilities are outlined below.

1. Budget and Fiscal Management

The Commission is responsible for the following budget and fiscal management functions:

a) Developing and recommending a policy for stable funding under which student publications can be assured of reasonable continuity.

b) Recommending criteria for budget processes and accountability for each student publication.

c) Provide an annual financial statement on expenditures.

d) Reviewing and recommending to the Vice President for Academic Affairs operational and equipment budgets for the student newspaper. The student newspaper budget proposal shall include projected revenues and expenditures from all sources, which may include General Fund, Instructionally Related Activities funds, advertising revenues, and such support as the Associated Students may deem appropriate. Budget management must take into account the framework of policy regulations and requirements governing each source of funding.

The Commission is responsible for the following policy-making functions:

a) Establishing and monitoring of managerial policy for student publications.

b) Recommending criteria and procedures for the hiring/firing of all staff, including editorial, reportorial, business, advertising and circulation, for the student newspaper.

c) Ensuring that the campus newspaper enjoys the rights and meets the responsibilities of a free press as provided by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and the applicable laws and regulations of the State of California and the United States of America.

d) Recommending to the President a faculty advisor for each student publication.

e) Establishing rules and regulations for the governance of the Commission.

f) Establishing criteria for advertising and salary rates.

g) Establishing policy for proposing and approving new student publications.

The Commission shall be composed of the following, all of whom shall be appointed by the President of the University:

Four (4) student members, nominated by the Associated Students President, to include two Communications majors.

Three (3) faculty members, nominated by the Academic Senate, who are not advisors to approved publications.

One (l) member, nominated by the Vice President of Academic Affairs.

One (l) member, nominated by the Vice President of Student Affairs.

Two (2) non-voting at-large members, from the communications profession and off-campus community, identified by the President after consultation within the University.

The publications advisor and editor-in-chief will serve as ex-officio non-voting members of the Commission.

One (l) ex-officio non-voting representative from the Office of Fiscal Affairs.

D. Annual Report

The Commission shall report in writing annually to the President on its activities and the status of student publications.

To: Vice Presidents, Deans
       Department Chairs
       Program Heads
Date: December 15, 1989
PM 89-19
From: Robert C. Detweiler, President
Subject: Policy and Procedures for Dealing with and Reporting Possible Misconduct in Science

Attached is a copy of interim policy and procedures for dealing with and reporting possible misconduct in science. The federal government requires such policy of all institutions that apply for or receive funding from the U.S. Public Health Service. (At Dominguez Hills, we currently receive more than $400,000 from the agency.)

To meet the deadline of January 1, 1990, established by the federal government, the policy and procedures are effective immediately. This document is to be reviewed during the coming year, however, and, with the help of the Academic Senate, a more permanent policy adopted.

INTRODUCTION

Scientific research is a major force in the life of the university. Faculty are involved in a number of projects designed to add to our knowledge, provide students with the latest findings in a field, and/or explore solutions to problems we find in the world around us. A recent report of the Association of American Medical Colleges

(AAMC) points out:

Guiding...researchers in their pursuit of scientific truths have been the basic and universally-accepted tenets of the process of scientific inquiry and investigation. Key elements of the process are the objective and accurate reporting of data accumulated in the course of experimentation, and verification of research findings to assure valid conclusions. In addition, generally-sanctioned standards of conduct and propriety, when followed, not only assure the integrity of the scientific profession, but engender public support for, and lend credibility to, the scientific endeavor as a whole.¹

In recent years, a few violations of these principles have brought public scrutiny to the research process. The U.S. Public Health Service issued a set of "interim policies" concerning "Misconduct in Science" in 1986.² Finally, PHS issued a "Final Rule" on August 8, 1989 which "sets forth the responsibilities of PHS awardee and applicant institutions for dealing with and reporting alleged or suspected misconduct in science...."³ Under the new regulations, a formal assurance (PHS Form 6315) must be filed with the agency's Office of Scientific Integrity (OSI) no later than January 1, 1990

          This set of Policy and Procedures is written to apply the new requirements set down by the Public Health Service within the framework of the university. It is designed to deal with any possible allegations of misconduct on the part of campus researchers while protecting their rights and privacy throughout the process. Furthermore, the document takes into account relevant provisions of the collective bargaining agreement between the CSU and the California Faculty Association.⁴

DEFINITIONS⁵

           "Misconduct" or "Misconduct in Science" means fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of fact.

           "Inquiry" means information gathering and initial fact finding to determine whether an allegation or apparent instance of misconduct warrants an investigation.

           "Investigation" means the formal examination and evaluation of all relevant facts to determine if misconduct has occurred.

           "OSI" means Office of Scientific Integrity, a component of the Office of the Director of the National Institutes of Health.

UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES

            The AAMC lists a set of "imperatives that should guide any institutional process for dealing with allegations of misconduct..."⁶ They can be translated into a set of underlying principles that meet federal requirements within the CSUDH environment:

The university should ensure that the process used to resolve allegations of misconduct does not damage science itself.

The university should provide vigorous leadership in the pursuit and resolution of all charges.

All parties should be treated with justice, fairness, and sensitivity for their reputations and vulnerabilities.

Procedures should preserve the highest attainable degree of confidentiality compatible with an effective and efficient response to allegations of misconduct.

The integrity of the process should be maintained by painstaking avoidance of real or apparent conflict of interest.

Procedures should be as expeditious as possible leading to resolution of allegations in a timely manner.

Pertinent facts and actions should be documented at each stage of the process.

The policies and procedures set out in the following sections are based on these principles.

ALLEGATIONS OF MISCONDUCT

          Allegations of misconduct in science must be submitted in writing to the Dean of Faculty Affairs. Any individual considering filing an allegation may meet confidentially with the Dean of Faculty Affairs prior to preparation of the written document to determine whether the concerned activity falls within the definition of misconduct or whether it is more appropriate to first bring it to the attention of the department chair or other official responsible for oversight of the research in question.

When a formal written allegation of misconduct in science is filed, it is the responsibility of the Dean of Faculty Affairs to initiate an inquiry as outlined below.

In a case where an individual has discussed a concern with the Dean of Faculty Affairs which appears to contain sufficient cause to warrant an inquiry, but the individual does not file a formal allegation, an inquiry should be initiated even without a "complainant." In all cases, every attempt should be made to maintain confidentiality for those who submit allegations of misconduct in science.

INQUIRY

An inquiry is initiated by the Dean of Faculty Affairs following receipt of an allegation of misconduct in research. As stated by the AAMC, during an inquiry:

. . . factual information is gathered and expeditiously reviewed to determine if an investigation of the charge is warranted.... [It] is not a formal hearing; it is designed to separate allegations deserving of further investigation from frivolous, unjustified, or clearly mistaken allegations.⁷

Dean of the School of the faculty member against whom the allegation has been filed;

One faculty member from the discipline in which the research is being conducted; and

One faculty member from another discipline (recommended by the Academic Senate).

       The Dean of Faculty Affairs shall notify all parties to the allegation in writing as to the nature of the charges and provide them with copies of any documentation submitted by the complainant. All documents and allegations must be held confidential at the inquiry stage.

       The Ad Hoc Committee is charged with making a determination whether or not a formal investigation is warranted. Committee recommendations should be made to the Dean of Faculty Affairs and documented in writing. Both the respondent and the complainant should be informed promptly whether there will be any further investigation. If an investigation is warranted, the allegation of misconduct along with supporting documentation and the report of the Ad Hoc Committee shall be forwarded to the Investigation Committee as outlined in the section below. In conforming to federal regulations, the agency sponsoring the research in question should be notified at this point.

        In recognizing the serious and sensitive nature of any allegations of misconduct in scientific research, the AAMC states:

    If an allegation is found to be unsupported but has been submitted in good faith, no further formal action, other than informing all involved parties, should be taken. The proceedings of an inquiry, including the identity of the respondent, should be held in strict confidence to protect the parties involved. If confidentiality is breached, the institution should take reasonable steps to minimize the damage to reputations that may result from inaccurate reports.

INVESTIGATION

If an investigation is warranted, it shall begin within 30 days of its recommendation by the Ad Hoc Committee.

The purpose of an investigation is to explore further the allegations and determine whether misconduct has been committed.... The investigation should focus on accusations of misconduct and examine the factual materials of each case.⁹

• Dean of Science, Mathematics and Technology;
• Dean of Social and Behavioral Sciences
• Dean of Professional Health Programs;
• Seven (7) faculty members as follows:
• Two (2) from the School of Science, Mathematics and Technology;
• Two (2) from the School of Social and Behavioral Science;
• One (l) from the Professional Health Programs; and
• Two (l) drawn from the School of Education, School of Humanities and Fine Arts, and School of Management; and
• One (l) public member from a field with either legal or ethical expertise.

        Members shall be appointed for two year terms with the terms of faculty and public members being staggered. A full term of office (following the initial appointment of members) shall begin on July 1 and run two years ending on June 30. The Dean of Faculty Affairs shall annually designate one of the Dean members as Chair of the Committee for the following year beginning July 1.

        Investigations shall be initiated by the Dean of Faculty Affairs by written notification to the Chair of CORS accompanied by all documentation from the inquiry. Investigation procedures should be in line with those outlined in the AAMC's Framework for Institutional Policies and Procedures to Deal with Misconduct in Research.¹⁰

        The complainant and respondent shall be notified of the investigation with all involved parties invited to provide information related to the allegation of misconduct. All relevant information shall be presented to the respondent in a manner allowing for full preparation of a response to the charges. The respondent must be accorded the opportunity to "address the charges and evidence in detail." While the function of the investigation is fact finding, the respondent may choose to retain legal counsel for the purposes of advice.

        If deemed to be necessary and recommended by CORS, interim administrative action may to taken to: l) Protect human subjects involved in the research under review (as provided in the campus Human Subjects policy; 2) protect animal subjects in the research under review (as provided in the campus Animal Subjects Assurance); or 3) prevent inappropriate expenditure of funds on the research under review.

        The following excerpts from federal regulations are pertinent to the conduct of an investigation of alleged misconduct in science:¹¹

(7).... The investigation normally will include examination of all documentation, including but not necessarily limited to relevant research data and proposals, publications, correspondence, and memoranda of telephone calls. Whenever possible, interviews should be conducted of all individuals involved either in making the allegation or against whom the allegation is made, as well as other individuals who might have information regarding key aspects of the allegations; complete summaries of these interviews should be prepared, provided to the interviewed party for comment or revision, and included as part of the investigatory file.

(8) Securing necessary and appropriate expertise to carry out a thorough and authoritative evaluation of the relevant evidence....

(10) Preparing and maintaining the documentation to substantiate the investigation's findings....

(11) Taking interim administrative actions, as appropriate, to protect Federal funds and insure that the purposes of the Federal financial assistance are carried out.

(15) Notifying the OSI [Office of Scientific Integrity] of the final outcome of the investigation.

       The Committee on Research Standards should complete its investigation "within 120 days of its initiation. This includes conducting the investigation, preparing the report of findings, making the report available for comment by the subjects of the investigation, and submitting the report..."¹² If the investigation cannot be completed within the 120 day limit, a written request for an extension must be submitted to OSI. The request must include "an explanation for the delay that includes an interim report on the progress to date and an estimate for the date of completion of the report....¹³

  The findings of CORS must be submitted in writing to the Dean of Faculty Affairs. The findings should be retained in a confidential file. An investigation of misconduct may result in any one of several outcomes, including:¹⁴

1. A finding of misconduct;

2. A finding that no culpable conduct was committed, but serious scientific errors were discovered;

3. A finding that no fraud, misconduct or serious scientific error was committed.

Notification of the findings and recommendations of CORS shall be provided to all parties to the investigation and the agency funding the research.

DISCIPLINARY ACTION

         If the findings of the investigation suggest that there may be cause for disciplinary action against either the respondent or a complainant whose allegations were "maliciously motivated," the Dean of Faculty Affairs should initiate a disciplinary action proceeding in line with the provisions of the current Collective Bargaining Agreement.¹⁵

¹Association of American Medical Colleges, Framework for Institutional Policies and Procedures to Deal with Misconduct in Research, Washington, DC, (March 1989), p.l.

²NIH Guide for Grants and Contracts, July 18,1986.

³54 Federal Register 32446.

⁴"Agreement Between the Board of Trustees of the California State University and the California Faculty Association, Unit 3 - Faculty (July 1,1987 - June 30, 1991).

⁵Code of Federal Regulations, Title 42, Subchapter D, Part 50, Subpart A, ~1 50.102 as published August 8, 1989 in the Federal Register, 54 FR 32447.

⁶Association of American Medical Colleges, op.cit., p.2.

⁷Ibid.,p.6.

⁸Ibid.,p.8.

⁹Ibid,p.9.

¹⁰EIbid., pp. 9-11.

¹¹Code of Federal Regulations, Title 42, Subpart D, Part 50, Subpart A, q 50.103(d) as published August 8,1989 in the Federal Register, 54 FR 32450.

¹²54 FR 32450

¹³Ibid.

¹⁴AAMC, op.cit., p.11

¹⁵Agreement Between the Board of Trustees of the California State University and the California Faculty Association, Unit 3 - Faculty, op.cit., Article 19, A@Disciplinary Action Procedure@ or, if after June 30,1991, the corresponding provisions of the collective bargaining agreement in force as of the date of filing the allegation of misconduct.