Faculty Senate minutes : 10/01

TO THE MEMBERS OF
THE ACADEMIC COUNCIL
THIRTY-THIRD SENATE
Report No. 2

SUMMARY OF ACTIONS

At its meeting on Thursday, October 25, 2001, the Thirty-fourth Senate of the Academic Council heard reports and took the following actions:

1. Approved by unanimous voice vote the following revisions to the Statement of Policy on Appointment and Tenure, as set forth in SenD#5257, and as recommended by the Provost and by the Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Policies for New Parents.

Part IV, Section 1. b was amended to read as follows:

A faculty member who becomes a parent, by birth or adoption, while serving under an appointment which accrues time toward tenure by length of service may, subject to any necessary reappointment, request that the time after which tenure would be conferred by length of service be extended by one year. Faculty who request this extension are expected to have substantial and sustained child care responsibilities. Requests should be received by the Provost within one year of the arrival of the child. In addition, requests should be received prior to the beginning of the faculty member's final year of tenure-accruing service. For adoptive parents to be eligible for this extension, it is expected that the child will be no older than five years of age at the time of the adoption.

Part IV, Section 3 was also amended as follows:

The words "new parenthood" replaced the word "maternity" and the word "untenured" was inserted before "full-time service."

2. By unanimous voice vote, and upon recommendation of the Committee on Graduate Studies:

The Senate authorized the Executive Committee of the Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources to initiate a graduate degree program and to nominate candidates for the Ph.D. degree and, in conjunction with the Schools of Law, Medicine and Business, for the M.S. degree, in Interdisciplinary Studies of Science, Policy and Technology, for a period of five years, from September 1, 2002 through August 31, 2007.

3. Accepted the 2000/01 annual report of the Committee on Graduate Studies, presented by its chair Professor Steven Zipperstein

SUSAN W. SCHOFIELD

Academic Secretary to the University

MINUTES, OCTOBER 25

Call to Order

Senate Chair John Rickford (Linguistics) called the Senate to order at 3:18 p.m. There were 41 voting members, 5 ex-officio members, and several guests in attendance.

Approval of Minutes

The minutes of the October 11, 2001 meeting of Senate XXXIV (SenD#5260) were approved as submitted.

Memorial Resolutions

The Chair recognized Professor Julie Parsonnet to present a memorial statement in honor of Dr. Paul Basch. Rickford advised that the full text of the memorial resolution had been included in Senate packets and would be published in the next Stanford Report.

Dr. Paul Basch, Professor Emeritus of Health Research and Policy since his retirement in 1997, died on June 14th at the age of 67. Dr. Basch, born in Vienna, escaped the Third Reich in the Kindertransport, arriving in England with his younger brother. He subsequently immigrated to the U.S. with his parents, who also managed to escape. He surmounted this difficult childhood to become a world-renowned parasitologist, particularly expert in the field of Schistosomiasis. Dr. Basch, who joined the Stanford faculty in 1970, had a passion for parasitology and enthusiastically taught generations of undergraduates and medical students. He was loved by many students he personally mentored; they sensed his commitment to their education and well being. Dr. Basch's focus on diseases of developing countries naturally evolved over time to an interest in international health policy, the main focus of his work for the last 15 years. His authoritative Textbook of International Health, first published in 1990 and revised in 1999, is considered a landmark in the field. His other books and more than 100 research papers highlight an outstanding career of scholarship. Paul was a warm and caring man. We, his colleagues and friends, consider ourselves fortunate to have known him and to have worked with him. We will miss his wisdom, directness of expression, imagination, and his irrepressible wit.

Following the statement, members of the Senate stood for a traditional moment of silence. The Chair thanked the memorial committee, consisting of Doctors Alice Whittemore, Mark Hlatky, and Julie Parsonnet, for the resolution.

Report from the Senate Steering Committee

Chair Rickford encouraged Senate members to use the yellow sheets placed at their desks to note topics of interest for future Senate discussion. He advised that Vice Provost Bravman's and President Hennessy's report on the Campaign for Undergraduate Education and the Think Again tour, deferred when time ran out at the October 11th Senate meeting, could not be rescheduled until January. Rickford also indicated that the Steering Committee, seeking effective follow-up of the Senate's October 11th discussion of undergraduate advising, had written to the Chair of the Committee on Undergraduate Studies. The letter asked that two particular issues be pursued, with a report back by Spring Quarter: earlier timing for declaring the major and suggestions to achieve increased faculty involvement in advising. Rickford drew attention to several future Senate agenda items, and reminded elected and ex officio members of the Informal Executive Session with the President and Provost following the regular Senate meeting on November 8th.

Committee on Committees

Professor Bruce Wooley (Electrical Engineering), Chair of the Committee on Committees, introduced the Senate members who had agreed to serve on CoC for the year: Wray Huestis (Chemistry), David Kreps (Graduate School of Business), Robin Mamlet (Dean of Undergraduate Admission and Financial Aid), David Palumbo-Liu (Comparative Literature), John Shoven (Economics), and David Spiegel (Psychiatry). He noted that their principal charge was to identify new members for various Academic Council and other committees, and encouraged Senate members themselves to volunteer or to suggest other colleagues, "but not as a way to punish them," he joked.

Reports from the President and the Provost

President Hennessy announced that he had just issued an Acts of Intolerance Protocol for Faculty, Staff, and Students. (Copies were placed at desks.) He commented that a previous protocol had applied only to students, was long and cumbersome, and "apparently, much to our chagrin, was kept confidential by Student Affairs." The new protocol is simple, he said, and ensures a speedy response that will protect and better serve those who are the targets of such acts.

Provost Etchemendy summarized the University's response to an incident the previous Monday, when a threatening letter containing a white powder had been received at the 651 Serra building. The FBI later determined that the substance was not hazardous, he said, but all Stanford personnel should use caution if they receive suspicious mail, and should call the campus police to handle it.

The Provost also announced that the budget process was beginning for the 2002/03 year. He advised that he had notified all vice presidents, vice provosts, and deans that there would be "on the order of $15 to $20 million less in general funds" after normal cost increases, than in the current year. Each unit was asked to develop an initial budget that would reflect a five percent general funds budget cut. This was in line with his prediction in the budget presentation to Senate the prior spring, he commented, noting that there had been $20 million in incremental funds available for new programs in the current budget year, but a similar amount would have to be cut for the next year. Responding to a later question from Professor Ridgeway (Sociology), the Provost described the university's yearlong budget planning process, governed by a Budget Group "consisting mainly of faculty from around the university and some staff." Certain global decisions, for example setting the staff and faculty salary programs, have a significant effect on remaining general funds, he said. Individual units and schools make presentations of their budget needs, and other financial forecasts of factors such as energy costs and endowment performance continue to be refined during Winter Quarter. Ultimately, he explained, the Budget Group recommends budget allocations for each unit, and the amount of agreement is remarkable. "Anybody in the Provost's position would come to roughly the same decisions at the end of the process," he asserted.

Open Forum

The Chair assured Senate members that "no soap box or other paraphernalia" were required to comment on any issues of interest to them as members of the faculty, with discussion for a maximum of ten minutes. When no one spoke up, Rickford joked that being Senate Chair had effectively muzzled him, so he would take the opportunity to jump in. He said he had heard an NPR program that morning describing more than 20 very diverse courses that had been developed rapidly at UCLA in response to the events of September 11th, and wondered whether faculty at Stanford in relevant departments might want to consider similar efforts. Professor Galli (Pathology) indicated that he thought it was a shame that there were apparently very few programs of Islamic Studies in American universities, and said he had read that enrollment in Arabic language courses at Stanford had doubled. Expanding Islamic studies at Stanford would respond to societal needs, Galli commented, and "would certainly signal to those among us who are Muslim that this is an area that Stanford values." Senate members volunteered that there were several courses related to Islam offered by the Religious Studies and History Departments, as well as a minor in Middle Eastern Languages and Cultures, though faculty coverage was thin and advanced language and literature courses were not available.

On a different subject, Professor Saldivar (English), former Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education, offered a few afterthoughts concerning the discussion of undergraduate advising at the prior Senate meeting. He reminded everyone that many faculty members are heavily involved in graduate student advising, which should not be left out of the mix. He also emphasized that the number of faculty teaching freshman and sophomore seminars had increased dramatically over the past several years. This provides another way of measuring faculty contact with undeclared undergraduates, he said, in addition to traditional service as freshman advisors, which is also important. Rickford declared the first "Open Forum" to be closed, and thanked Senate members for their contributions.

Report from the Provost's Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Policies for New Parents (SenD#5257)

Senate Chair Rickford introduced this item, referring to the cover letter, report and attachments from the Provost and his ad hoc committee, distributed in advance. The Senate was being asked, he said, to approve a policy revision to include the possibility of tenure clock extensions not just for mothers who give birth, but also for fathers and adoptive parents. He noted that the relevant Statement of Policy on Appointment and Tenure had last been revised by the Senate in 1996, and subsequently the Board of Trustees. There had been considerable discussion in Senate of issues related to child birth and child care, he noted. Rickford welcomed several members of the ad hoc committee as guests, and turned to one of them, Professor Brad Efron (Statistics), to present the proposal.

Efron indicated that the tenure clock policy had evolved over time, and that his committee had been asked to take a look at several issues. The issue before the Senate, he said, was the recommendation that extensions of the tenure clock be made available to fathers and adoptive parents as well as to birth mothers. He emphasized an important proviso that had been added to the policy and that would be implemented in the form used to apply for the extension: "Faculty who request this extension are expected to have substantial and sustained child care responsibilities." Efron also pointed out certain timing provisions in the language -- (a) requests should be made within one year of the birth or adoption of the child, (b) the adopted child should be no older than five years of age at the time of adoption, and (c) requests for the extension should be received prior to the faculty member's final year of tenure-accruing service. Provost Etchemendy offered to assist Efron and Senior Associate Provost Kathy Gillam in answering questions.

Professor Schatzberg (Psychiatry) commented that the policy language was unclear and could be interpreted as allowing a parent to extend the tenure clock for as many as three years related to the care of just one child. Senate members were assured that the existing and proposed policy intent was "one year per child," and that the Provost's Office would continue to administer it in that way. Professor Alexander (Law), noting that in the past she had taken advantage of the provision herself, expressed concern that the language seemed to be changing from a "right to have an extension" to the "ability to request an extension" without any criteria specified for approval or denial. Efron, Gillam, and Etchemendy explained that the process had always involved making a request, and that requests were normally granted.

Professor Martin (Graduate School of Business) expressed enthusiasm for the change. "I think we all know that when women have kids, it slows down their research productivity, no matter how much help they get. And we're not going to see a change in that until male parents begin to take on more of the work. And slowly but increasingly, they're doing that. I think it is symbolically crucial and it is practically important that the university encourage and recognize this change on the part of the male faculty and make the tenure clock extension available to them." She mentioned the two common objections to such a change: a) that with so many men on the faculty, there would be an overwhelming number of extensions; and b) that desperate male assistant professors would be "free riders" even though they hadn't changed a diaper in their lives. Martin then explained that research on paternity leave, in other countries, corporations, and universities, all indicates that very few men actually use these provisions. "It's a symbolic act," she stated. Very few men at Stanford will dare to ask their dean for a child care leave or a tenure clock extension, she predicted, and of those who dare, very few of them will be free riders.

Professor Goldsmith (Electrical Engineering) expressed the opinion that women as well as men might fear asking for such an extension, and suggested that the university could make a difference by having deans or department chairs seek out affected faculty members and encourage them to consider this option. She also wondered exactly what was meant by the term "substantial and sustained child care responsibilities." Gillam responded that the committee had thought a lot about this language and had decided not to specify it further. "We want faculty to decide for themselves," she stated, "and if they are willing to sign on the dotted line, we'll be happy with whatever they decide."

Professors Ridgeway (Sociology) and Gardner (Molecular Pharmacology and Medicine) agreed with Martin and supported the revision. Gardner did point out, however, that she had opposed such a change at Senate six years earlier, and was still worried about the fact that there are physiological changes caused by pregnancy and child birth, in addition to the challenges of caring for a new child. The Provost pointed out that a birth mother is entitled to disability leave and maternity leave, which are not available to fathers or adoptive parents. He also mentioned additional policies concerning teaching and clinical load reduction, which benefit the birth mother. These are under discussion with various deans, he said, and decisions would be reported to Senate at an upcoming meeting.

Gardner also asked if the committee had discussed the possibility of tenure clock extensions related to burdens other than child care, for example the care of aging parents or spouses with disabilities. Professors Palumbo-Liu (Comparative Literature) and Galli (Pathology) suggested that the policy should be made more flexible with regard to the disability or catastrophic illness of a child. These events could be unrelated to birth or age at adoption, but still require "substantial and sustained" child care responsibilities by a parent. Professor Jones (Biological Sciences), also Vice Provost for Faculty Development, confirmed that the policy is intended to allow the Provost a certain degree of decision-making flexibility in unusual circumstances such as those described. Efron and Etchemendy stressed that the current policy revision was designed specifically to cover birth and adoption of children, events that commonly coincide with a faculty member's untenured years. The Provost said he thought it was less clear whether a policy should try to address all the other possible events that might befall an untenured professor, but added that he would listen to the ad hoc committee's advice. Speaking to an earlier issue raised by Schatzberg about the appropriateness of tenure clock extensions that are not linked to leaves of absence, Ridgeway pointed out that going on leave meant giving up salary, which is not an option for many parents. "Generally when you have children, you have to feed them," she quipped.

"I think this is terrific," stated Professor Koseff (Civil and Environmental Engineering), noting that he had also supported it six years earlier and was delighted that Martin and Gardner were in favor. Efron revealed an error in Section 3 of the proposed language, which, as written, would appear to limit all professorial appointments, even those with tenure, to a maximum of ten years. He corrected the proposed text to read "... the total length of untenured full-time service at Stanford University..." Vice Provost Jones volunteered to answer a question the committee had anticipated but no one had yet asked. She advised that the Provost had approved in concept "a transition period of one year during which any current assistant professor who has become a new father or adoptive parent while an assistant professor and is not yet in the final year of the tenure clock may request a one-year extension under the new policy."

The Chair thanked Senate members for a fruitful discussion. He read the proposed revisions to the Statement of Policy on Appointment and Tenure, as set forth in SenD#5257, and as recommended by the Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Policies for New Parents and by the Provost, and as amended by Efron (Statistics).

Part IV, Section 1. b to be amended to read as follows:

Part IV, Section 3 to be amended as follows:

The words "new parenthood" will replace the word "maternity" and the word "untenured" will be inserted before "full-time service".

A motion and a second were made from the floor to approve the proposed revisions. The motion passed on a unanimous voice vote. Rickford expressed appreciation to the ad hoc committee for its excellent work and indicated that the Senate looked forward to learning about any related policy changes that might be implemented by the Provost. He thanked Assistant Professor Christopher Manning, "who I see doing sustained and significant child care," for coming to the meeting, and encouraged Senate members to feel free to invite other colleagues who might be interested in particular Senate discussions. Please let Trish del Pozzo know in advance so seats may be reserved, he noted.

Proposed New Interdisciplinary Graduate Program in Environment and Resources (SenD#5244)

Senate Chair Rickford welcomed Professor Zipperstein, Chair of the Committee on Graduate Studies, to present his committee's recommendation to create a new graduate program in interdisciplinary studies of science, policy, and technology. It will have both a Ph.D. degree, and a masters degree offered only to students already enrolled in the professional schools. He welcomed Professor Pam Matson, Director of the Earth Systems Program, as a guest and pointed out that Senate colleagues Dean Orr (School of Earth Sciences) and Rob Dunbar (Geological and Environmental Sciences) were also very involved in the creation of the new program.

Zipperstein described the report sent to Senate and the proposed program as "first rate." With great faculty strengths at Stanford in Earth Sciences, Humanities and Sciences, Engineering, Law, and other fields, it makes sense to develop an innovative program to explore environment and resource issues in an interdisciplinary fashion, he said. The only caveat expressed by C-GS was a general concern that the creation of all new programs should be met with some measure of caution, since Stanford clearly could not continue to grow endlessly. That said, Zipperstein observed that the current proposal anticipates very modest growth of no more than 25 to 30 incremental graduate students. He congratulated those who had shaped the program and said C-GS had "absolutely no reservations about its intellectual timber."

Dean Orr supported the program enthusiastically. He noted that a core group of eight faculty members had developed the proposal, but that it had also benefited greatly from the contributions of 25 more faculty members in several schools, and had been discussed by about 50 members of the faculty involved in environmental programs university-wide. The new program will draw strength, he said, from faculty with very strong foundations in the disciplines, from the enthusiastic group willing to take on its leadership, and from an initial grant of about $1.5 million from the Luce Foundation. Professor Matson, who led the development of the proposal, spoke about the "incredible group of faculty" who already know each other, conduct research and teach together, and very much want to create a true interdisciplinary opportunity for graduate students to address complex environmental issues. The program will be small, selective, flexible, and rigorous, she said, explaining that the masters degree would not be free-standing, but would be offered only to students already enrolled in the schools of Law, Business, and Medicine. Matson also advised that there is a real demand for an interdisciplinary program like this among potential students, many of them coming back to graduate school from the government, corporate or non-profit sectors. Upon obtaining a degree, they will have tenure-track job opportunities at academic institutions, as well as in NGOs and in government research programs, she said.

Professor Jones (Biological Sciences) suggested, from her experience initiating and chairing the interdisciplinary graduate program in Immunology some years before, that raising and sustaining stipend and tuition support for these new graduate students would be a very big challenge. Professor Cohen (Mathematics) also expressed concern about potential financial impacts of a new program, particularly entering a year of university budget cuts. Orr agreed that this was an ongoing issue, and advised that they were embarking on a fund raising campaign to supplement initial funds from the Luce and Goldman Foundations. Faculty would also support some students on their research grants, Dunbar added.

Professor Wasow (Linguistics) expressed real concern about the overall University impacts of adding graduate students, not just on student housing, but also on office and laboratory space and related constraints of Stanford's Santa Clara County general use permit (GUP). He noted that the effects of Ph.D. students, on campus for roughly six years, would be different than of enrolled masters students adding just one year. Provost Etchemendy indicated that he had encouraged Zipperstein to raise the larger issue of university-wide impacts of new programs. He added that in his view this important issue should in no way detract from the proposed program because it is "fantastic" and makes excellent use of existing faculty resources. Matson and Dunbar remarked that because faculty time was a serious constraint, they each would be likely to accept one less student in their home departments in order to take on a student in the new program. This would likely result in a net increase of significantly fewer than 25 students.

Professor Abernethy (Political Science) drew attention to an interesting paradox. "One of the key insights and complaints of environmentalists is that decisions are often made on non-environmental grounds that can have environmental impacts. And we're about to do just that," he stated. He said he had a problem with approving a program that might conceivably be "the straw that breaks the camel's back," without having information relevant to that decision. The President advised that the "environmental impact" of expanding Stanford's graduate student capacity had in fact been addressed as part of the GUP process. The Provost also indicated that he hoped to stabilize the graduate student population at existing levels, rather than experiencing a one or two percent per year rate of growth as calculated in the environmental studies for the GUP. Zipperstein said he believed it was procedurally incorrect to assume that a committee such as C-GS, tasked to rate the intellectual vitality of IDPs, could wrestle definitively with the broader issue of constraining growth, "arguably one of the central issues faced by our university, our state, and beyond." Senate Chair Rickford observed that this was just the sort of issue that the Senate's Planning and Policy Board, "waiting hungrily in the bushes for issues," might like to tackle. Schofield indicated that PPB had not been convened yet for 2001/02, so volunteers lurking in the bushes should feel free to contact her, and Koseff joked that he now knew what PPB stood for -- "planning and policy in the bushes."

Replying to a question from Professor Steele (Psychology), Matson indicated that different universities around the country were approaching studies of the environment in different ways, some moving existing departments into a new school. Stanford's interdisciplinary approach is very strong, she said, bringing together deep disciplinary strengths. She agreed with Professors Gardner (Molecular Pharmacology) and Parsonnet (Medicine/Infections Diseases) who urged that additional connections be developed with the Medical School, to take advantage of extremely relevant medical faculty expertise. An environmental resources masters degree might also be of interest to medical students, a large majority of whom take an extra year, with some school financial support, Gardner noted. Professor Elam (Drama) also encouraged the program to collaborate with humanists, a suggestion that Orr and Matson welcomed, noting that there were already connections with History.

Professor Koseff (Civil and Environmental Engineering) expressed strong support for the program and drew a parallel with the development of the undergraduate Earth Systems Program more than a decade earlier. Rather than having any negative impact on related departments, he said, the graduate program would serve to attract and retain top-flight students with interdisciplinary environmental interests, who would otherwise be lost to Stanford. Responding to a question from Professor Blume (Medicine/Bone Marrow Transplant), Matson indicated that the program was ready, if approved, to disseminate information immediately and anticipated a strong cohort of applicants for September 2002.

Professor Holloway (Graduate School of Business) said he believed that a small but interesting subset of MBA students would find the additional interdisciplinary master of science degree to be an attractive option. He asked for and received confirmation that 45 non-overlapping units would be required, and that the Senate was approving a new degree, offered in conjunction with the professional schools. Academic Secretary Schofield said that she would review the use of the term "joint M.S. degree" with the Registrar. [Note: The word "joint" was subsequently removed.]

Rickford thanked Senate members for their stimulating contributions. The following recommendation, moved and seconded by the Committee on Graduate Studies, was approved by unanimous voice vote:

The Senate authorizes the Executive Committee of the Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources to initiate a graduate degree program and to nominate candidates for the Ph.D. degree and, in conjunction with the Schools of Law, Medicine and Business, for the M.S. degree, in Interdisciplinary Studies of Science, Policy and Technology, for a period of five years, from September 1, 2002 through August 31, 2007.

2000/01 Annual Report of the Committee on Graduate Studies (SenD#5239)

Senate Chair Rickford called on Professor Zipperstein, Chair of the Committee on Graduate Studies, for the meeting's final presentation. Zipperstein summarized his committee's prior year deliberations in an extremely abbreviated fashion, given the late hour. He mentioned first the revision of the Residency Policy for Graduate Students, "which proved taxing almost beyond belief" and which could not have been done without the extraordinary work of Roger Printup, George Dekker, and Tom Wasow. Other committee recommendations approved by Senate include revised Minimum Progress Standards for Graduate Students and several interdisciplinary program renewals. Zipperstein reported that C-GS had also weighed in on issues of graduate student quality of life, in part through the chair's membership on the Graduate Deans and Administrators Working Group (GDAWG). Issues of minority recruitment and retention were so pressing, he noted, that a special Provost's Advisory Committee was being set up "to confront the issues with consistency and vigor."

A humorous exchange between Rickford, Zipperstein and Professor Koseff (Civil and Environmental Engineering) revealed that the very last student in the defunct Graduate Specials Program had recently finished his thesis. Professor Monismith (Civil and Environmental Engineering) encouraged C-GS to review University data concerning normative time to Ph.D., since that would relate directly to concerns expressed earlier about the impacts of new graduate programs. The Academic Secretary noted that this data was about to be produced for C-GS, and Zipperstein agreed to put it on the committee's agenda. Senate Chair Rickford accepted the 2000/01 Annual Report of the Committee on Graduate Studies on behalf of the Senate, thanking committee members for their work.

Accepting a motion and a second, the Chair declared the Senate meeting adjourned at 4:56 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Susan W. Schofield

Academic Secretary to the University