At its meeting of March 18, 1996, the Academic Senate approved the following Sense-of-the-Senate Resolution presented by Ken Peter for the Executive Committee.

Whereas, The Senate unanimously adopted SS-S95-5, which initiated the development of policy proposals designed to foster an appreciation of diversity at SJSU; and

Whereas, The policy committees of the Senate have spent one semester consulting with a plethora of campus experts and have reviewed a wide range of worthwhile proposals designed to implement the broad ranging vision of the "Diversity Resolution"; and

Whereas, The Ad Hoc Priorities Committee has reviewed these proposals, has consulted campus experts, has examined independent cost estimates, and has written this "Priorities Resolution" as called upon by SS-S95-5; and

Whereas, SS-S95-5 calls upon the Senate to set clear priorities "to stand as the Senate's advice by which to guide the implementation of this package of initiatives"; now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Senate adopts the following report as its best current advice for the next stage of policy development and implementation of the vision of SS-S95-5; be it further

Resolved, That the Senate affirms its earlier views that it is SJSU's highest aspiration to foster "a supportive learning environment that serves all" members of our diverse student body "equally well, and that budgetary priorities should be arranged to help the University achieve that aspiration."

Approved by the ad hoc Priorities Committee, by consensus; February 7, 1996

Members present: Shifflett, Peter, McNeil, Fimbel, Campsey, Dorosz, Milnes, Jochim.

Endorsed by the Executive Committee, February 12, 1996. Minor changes approved February 26, 1996.

Financial impact: See details in attached report.

Contact: Chair Bethany Shifflett, 42440

SS-S95-5 (aka "The Diversity Resolution"), which was passed unanimously by the Academic Senate in the Spring of 1995, declared that SJSU's budgetary priorities should be arranged to help the University achieve its highest aspiration--fostering a supportive learning environment that serves all members of our diverse student body equally well. The resolution also initiated a series of specific measures designed to help achieve that aspiration. At the time the resolution was passed, however, it was clear to the Senate that there would be a need to evaluate which of the multiple initiatives should be implemented first, and to what extent, and over what period of time. In order to set those priorities SS-S95-5 recommended the creation of a special ad hoc Priorities Committee that would accept preliminary proposals, put them in order of priority, and then submit them to the Senate for a follow-up endorsement.⁽¹⁾

^{This report fulfills the charge given to the ad hoc "Diversity Resolution" Priorities Committee. That committee met extensively throughout December and January to consider the numerous proposals that had been drafted. In January it conducted an invitational forum to consult with many campus leaders and experts on the relative priorities the proposals should hold. Offering advice were the Special Assistant to the President for Campus Climate, the IAVP for Faculty Affairs, the AVP for Undergraduate Studies, Dean of the College of Education, representatives from Student Development Services, the Faculty Enhancement Council, the Institute for Teaching and Learning, experts in linguistics and language development and in communication studies, and the Chair of the Affirmative Action committee. The Committee believes the level of advice it received to have been of an extremely high level of quality, from professionals who collectively have decades of experience in implementing programs similar to those which we propose below. The collective advice of these experts proved to be decisive in shaping our recommendations.}

^{By design, this report does not address the implementation of the curricular reforms endorsed by SS-S95-5. Under the procedures outlined in that resolution, Board of General Studies (BOGS) is directed to prepare a detailed proposal to be submitted to the University Curriculum and Research Committee and subsequently to the Senate for appropriate action. The remaining policy initiatives launched by SS-S95-5, however, are all subject to the need for prioritization. They include efforts in the areas of faculty and staff development, student advising and orientation, and curricular assessment.}

^{The Committee has been very mindful of its responsibility to weigh both the costs and the benefits of the proposals in making its assessment. The Committee required that the proposals be sufficiently detailed so that reasonable cost-estimates could be obtained. Educational Planning and Resources was extremely forthcoming and worked very hard to provide the best possible estimates--for both the proposals which follow, as well as the proposals which were not included in the final list of priorities. By being very selective, and by choosing those options that seemed to us to promise the most benefits for the most reasonable costs, the Priorities Committee recommends the implementation of programs that will cost the University a small fraction of what a full and immediate implementation of all aspects of SS-S95-5 would have required. Painful decisions to pass up certain worthy programs had to be made in favor of alternatives that we felt would best accomplish the Diversity Resolution's goals.}

^{Despite the fiscal prudence of the Priorities Committee, the recommendations that it does make will still consume resources. At least some of the funds for these programs will have to be redirected from existing expenditures. The Priorities Committee recommends that the Senate accept the administration's invitation to have the Senate Budget Advisory Committee work with the administration to identify existing funds--whether they derive from state, lottery, development, fundraising or other sources--that can and should be directed towards these diversity efforts.}

^{The programs endorsed by the ad hoc Priorities Committee follow. The Committee has ranked them in order of priority, but it also feels that these measures are separated in importance by very small margins. The University should adopt each of them as resources permit.}

1. Construction of a system of staff development centered on the diversity present in our metropolitan university community.

We are aware that some in-service training is already underway to train staff on matters of diversity. We applaud these efforts and urge that they be continued, expanded, and eventually made universal and regular.

Guidelines:

a. Those staff who have the most contact with students should be the first to receive in-service training, with the program continuing until all staff have received them, and then continuing as a part of an orientation for all new staff.

b. The content of these seminars should reflect the guidelines included in SS-S95-5.^{(2) It is especially important for the program to include means for students to communicate their needs and concerns to staff.}

^{c. Staff performance reviews should include an evaluation of how well staff serve our diverse customers.}

^Financing:

^{The expense to rotate all staff (non unit III) through twenty to forty hours of training would fall between $30k and $60k. Continuing the program in future years would require roughly one quarter of the initial funds on an annual basis, to account for approximately a 25% annual turnover in staff.}

^{Implementation:}

^{The Senate recommends that responsibility for implementation of this initiative rest with the Vice President for Administration acting through Human Resources. He/she may wish to consult with the Professional Standards Committee and with Faculty Affairs to find common ground between the program for staff and the programs for faculty (below.) The Senate requests the VPA to provide periodic progress reports, as requested by the Executive Committee.}

^{2. Construction of a system of faculty development centered on the diversity present in our metropolitan university community.}

^{A system of faculty development should offer faculty multiple opportunities and incentives to embrace issues of diversity in their teaching, service, and research. The Professional Standards Committee should consult with groups such as Faculty Affairs, the Institute for Teaching and Learning, the Faculty Enhancement Council, University Advancement, and other experts. It should craft Senate resolutions as required to lead to the proactive steps outlined below.}

^Guidelines:

^{a. Policy revisions for Metropolitan Diversity. More explicit language is needed in all relevant university policies to especially recognize teaching, service, and research that focus on matters of diversity. This might be accomplished, in part, by revising policy to reflect an emphasis on the metropolitan character of the university.}

^{b. Diversity Follow-up Grants. In Spring of 1997 all campus departments will hold workshops for their faculty on the subject of teaching in a diverse environment. $235k has already been authorized by the Lottery Committee and the President to conduct these workshops and to provide expertise that will assist departments in planning them. These one-time workshops will broach key diversity-related issues in pedagogy, curriculum, and the professional development of students. However, for the workshops to have a deep or lasting impact, they must be followed-up with a program of longer term faculty development centered on diversity.}

^{Accordingly, a system of small faculty development grants should be created in order to proactively foster the continuing engagement of all regular faculty in issues of diversity. These grants shall be made available following the lottery-funded diversity workshops, and as an outcome of the workshops themselves, individual departments should develop an internal grant development and review process targeted to meet diversity needs identified as high priority within those departments. College Deans will be responsible for reviewing and approving department plans, but not the specific grants. There must be evidence that department faculty derived significant information from students within the discipline area in developing the grant plans. Several main uses of such grants are contemplated:}

^{1) As a contribution toward research on matters of diversity, particularly research based on campus or in this metropolitan area.}

^{2) As a contribution towards development of special orientation, advising, pedagogical tools or techniques targeted towards diversity issues important within the department.}

^{3) As support for attendance at a conference that has as its primary focus issues of diversity related to a metropolitan community such as San Jose. Funding to attend supplemental diversity workshops at regular professional conferences might also be supported, as well as workshops that could be provided at SJS.}

^{4) For such other diversity related scholarly uses as deemed appropriate within the department.}

^{Funding: Funds available for "diversity follow-up grants" shall total $200k per year for academic years 1997-98, 1998-99, and 1999-2000. Funds shall be allocated to departments in the amount of $725 per regular faculty member over the three year period (1997-2000). Individual tenure-track and tenured faculty awards will be limited to an accumulated maximum of $725. Departments and Colleges are encouraged to supplement funds as budgets permit, and faculty are encouraged to use them as seed money for continuing funding opportunities.}

^{Outcome Requirement: All faculty members shall be required to disseminate to their colleagues, and insofar as possible to incorporate into their academic assignments, the outcomes of the diversity grants. Such dissemination might take the form of seminars, training workshops, teaching materials, films, or such other informational vehicles as seem appropriate to the particular discipline.}

^{c. Temporary Faculty Orientation. All temporary faculty and Teaching Associates should receive an orientation to our diverse metropolitan university. Participation could be a condition for reappointment.}

^{d. Faculty Affairs Sponsored Programs. Faculty Affairs should make it a priority to support faculty development programs, seminars, materials, etc. that further the goal of fostering a supportive learning environment for all members of our diverse student body. The Senate Budget Advisory Committee should work with the administration to identify a minimum of $50k in resources that can be used expressly for this purpose. Final approval for the allocation of these funds will come from the Provost.}

^Financing:

^{$600k spread over three years (beginning AY 1997-98) for the follow-up grants, a minimum of $10k annually for the orientation sections for temporary faculty, and $50k annually for the Faculty Affairs sponsored programs. The cost estimates did not include the costs for orientation for Teaching Associates, which would be expected to be a minimal addition.}

^{Fundraising to support faculty development should be priority at SJSU. Appropriate Senate committees, as designated by the Executive Committee, should work with University Advancement to help develop models and materials to be used in soliciting support for faculty development programs such as those mentioned above. Fundraising efforts might stress the ties to the metropolitan area faculty have forged through their teaching, service, and research. All faculty should make themselves available, where appropriate, to help University advancement efforts.}

^{Implementation:}

^{The Professional Standards Committee should refine the details of these programs, in consultation with relevant campus experts such as Faculty Affairs, the Institute for Teaching and Learning, and the Faculty Enhancement Council. The programs should be administered by Faculty Affairs, with ITL serving in an advisory capacity.}

^{3. Establishment of a Student Orientation and Resource Center.}

^{A center which provides students with easy access to a full range of support services should be established at SJSU. After consultation with many campus experts, the Senate's Instruction and Student Affairs Committee has prepared a detailed plan for what such a center should include. Among other things, such a center should provide orientation, general advising, and serve as a clearinghouse for assistance to students in overcoming the practical hurdles that stand between them and their ability to receive a quality education in a supportive learning environment.}

^{The committee finds the creation of this center to be crucial for the well being of our students, for student retention, and especially for matters of diversity. The recent literature in the field indicates that "developmental advising" is crucial for the academic success of a diverse student population--only such advising provides the individualized contact necessary to respond to the enormous range of needs held by our diverse student body. By serving as the hub of a campus-wide advising network, by providing "one-stop shopping" for student services, and by coordinating a system of orientation, such a center could markedly decrease student alienation and improve the chances of success for the full range of our diverse student body.}

^{The committee is aware that a Presidential Task force is also at work on a similar proposal, and we encourage them to consider the full details of the Instruction and Student Affairs proposal in their deliberations.}

^{The Instruction and Student Affairs Committee should consult with campus experts on advising, orientation, retention, and related issues, and should coordinate its efforts with the President's Task Force on Student Retention, in order to craft any necessary Senate resolutions to lead to the establishment of a student resource center with the following features:}

^Guidelines:

^{a. It should be open during non-traditional hours.}

^{b. It should have a staff that includes professionals trained in orientation, in advising, and the relationship of these to matters of diversity, and who are capable of providing campus leadership in these areas.}

^{c. It should be customer-oriented, and should provide as many student services as can be conveniently housed under one roof.}

^{d. It should publish or contribute to the publication of a Campus Climate guide for universal distribution on campus.}

^{e. It should provide General Education advising, advising for undeclared students, and advising for probationary or disqualified students. Where feasible, it should utilize interactive technologies to answer students' most common questions.}

^{f. It should serve as clearinghouse for information on resources available for students--including both academic resources and also those concerning cultural, ethnic, lifestyle, gender, and spiritual resources available both on campus and in the metropolitan community.}

^{g. It should support the efforts of advisors by providing them with seminars, materials, etc. that may enhance their advising skills.}

^{h. It should coordinate and supervise a system of orientation. Students who do not complete one of the currently available orientation courses should be required, at a minimum, to visit the center. This might be accomplished with an orientation flag similar to the existing advising flag.}

^Financing:

^{Costs cannot be estimated until the Instruction and Student Affairs proposal and the work of the Task Force are synthesized. If all equipment were new and all staff were new hires, the ISA proposal would cost appx. $40k for equipment, $3k-$8k in annual operating expenses, $196k for three full-time professionals, and $162k for the part-time interns and support staff. However, it is very likely that some or all of these expenses will be unnecessary--that some or all of the equipment and staff will be redeployed from various existing campus agencies.}

^{Implementation:}

^{Specific advice regarding implementation is difficult until the question of which administrative unit(s) should take responsibility for the center is resolved. Careful thought should be given to finding an inter-divisional method of administering the Center. There is a pressing need for this Center to integrate functions that might currently fall within our Student Affairs Division and also functions (such as the heavy involvement of faculty advisors) that would fall within our Academic Affairs division. Bureaucratic divisions should not stand in the way of providing students with a seamless system of support.}

4. Development of Curricular Assessment measures.

The recent WASC accreditation report suggested that SJSU consider better integration of its assessment efforts. Currently the Curriculum and Research Committee is developing recommendations for campus organization and management of assessment. One aspect of assessment is curricular, and success in achieving education in diversity is an important element of curricular assessment.

As the integrated program in campus assessment proceeds, high priority should be placed on evaluating curricula with respect to their ability to achieve student understanding and appreciation of diversity.

1. ¹ Except for this short introduction, the Committee believes that the text of SS-S95-5 speaks for itself, and that there is little need to reiterate the language of that document in making this report. We therefore direct your attention to the "Diversity Resolution" for the rationale and the history that lies behind the work of the Committee.

2. ²With regard to staff development, SS-S95-5 states: "all employees should be knowledgeable in the principles of 'customer service' and the importance of satisfying SJSU's 'customers.' Understanding the cultural and linguistic backgrounds of the customers is essential to be able to provide quality service. Furthermore, the curriculum should remind employees that they are representatives of SJSU and how they interact with SJSU's customers will characterize the institution's public image and establish the tone for campus climate."