Home > Minutes, Agendas, & Reports: 1997-98

Minutes, Agendas & Reports


University of Hawaii at Manoa Faculty Senate, April 22, 1998

Law School, Classroom 2

41 Senators Present: Nell Altizer, Barry Baker, Caroline Blanchard, Thomas Brislin, Patricia Burrell, Catherine Caveletto, Rahul Chattergy, Ross Christensen, James Cowan, John Cox, Steve Dawson, Robert Duesterhaus, Marilyn Dunlap, Samir El-Swaify, Kathy Ferguson, Elizabeth Fisher, John Halloran, Patricia Hickman, Kathryn Hoffmann, Ruth Horie, Casey Jarman, Judith Kellogg, Kenneth Kipnis, Sumner LaCroix, David Lally, William Lampe, Nancy Lind, Michael Maglaya, John Mahoney, Alexander Malahoff, Gertraud Maskarinec, Jennifer Matsuda, Peter Nicholson, Thomas Olson, Tom Ramsey, Miriam Sharma, Eldon Wegner, Joel Weiner, Lesley Wright, Dina Yoshimi, David Yount

8 Senators Excused: Donna Ching, Robert Cooney, Gwen Naguwa, Aspy Palia, Alison Regan, Thomas Schroeder, Randal Wada, Halina Zaleski

19 Senators Absent: Alton Arakaki, Sandra Chang, Virgie Chattergy, Eric Decarlo, Arnold Edelstein, Stephen Ferreira, James Gaines, Sue Hanson, John Hardman, Roderick Jacobs, Stacey Marlow, Karl Minke, Jane Moulin, C.S. Papacostas, Gay Reed, Morris Saldov, Steven Seifried, Virginia Tanji, Roy Wilkins

Members of the Administration: Kenneth Mortimer, Dean Smith, Tom Bopp, Doris Ching, Judith Inazu

Nine visitors signed the guest list.

Chair Alex Malahoff opened the meeting at 3:10.

1. Minutes of Senate meeting of March 18, 1998, were approved with a humorous typo correction.

2. President Mortimer addressed the Senate and reported that the numbers for the budget at the Legislature are still fluctuating. In recent days things are looking better, if a 5 percent State funding cut can be called looking better. Under discussion are the payroll lag and collective bargaining raises. Looking ahead, the next revenue forecast is at the end of May, the Governor's restrictions might come in early July. If UH gets restrictions we are free to decide where to cut. The autonomy bills are going fairly well. UH is requesting that funds be transferred from the attorney General's office if the UH is able to hire its own lawyers.

President Mortimer reported he is already taking action on the Senate's recommendations for changes in undergraduate programs/education. He sees the changes as important, and the process lengthy. He anticipates that 1998-99 will be a year of debate on the campus about undergraduate education. He plans to stimulate discussions and thought by a series of conferences and invited speakers. In about a week he may announce an August planning project for setting up the learning communities for Freshmen in fall, 1999. He plans to look at the Manoa reward system with respect to teaching. "I'm told it has been a long time since we discussed it. I want to begin this debate in the fall. It's a serious debate, it will take a while, and we ought to have it."

In reply to a question asking whether he is prepared for a cut in administrative spending since faculty are looking for cuts, the President replied that all units, including administration, are engaged in planning for cuts, and he expects to have fewer deans, financial officers, and administrative support positions. In making cuts we need to keep in mind such things as EPA requirements about our ability to handle dangerous chemicals.

3. Dean Smith, Interim Senior VPAA/EVC, reported on the Manoa Strategic Plan. The University Strategic Plan was before the Senate last year and later approved by the BOR. Each campus was asked to prepare its own strategic campus plan. He is now at the draft/input collection stage and plans to go to the BOR in May or possibly June. Copies of an April 21, 1998, draft titled "Manoa at 100: University of Hawaii at Manoa, Vision and Strategic Objectives for the UH Manoa Strategic Plan 1998-2007" were distributed to Senators and it is also available at www2.hawaii.edu\svpevc Input is desired, and should be sent to Dean Smith.

4. Doris Ching, Vice President for Student Affairs, reported on three Senate programs in her area. The undergraduate experience proposals are very constructive. The Faculty Ambassadors program has generated very good feedback from principals, prospective students, and their parents. The very positive impact in such a short time has meant a lot to UH. The Alumni Affairs Office is interested in joining forces by sending alumni to schools. She also reported strong support for the Admissions Oversight Committee. Finally, she announced her office will be doing a survey of incoming freshmen this summer and invited faculty to look at the questions and provide suggestions.

5. Marilyn Dunlap reported the Faculty Service Committee has canceled the current election of the SEC. New ballots will go out after the May meeting of the Senate. The Committee will propose revisions next year to the charter regarding SEC elections.

6. Resolution on Faculty Involvement in Reorganization: Eldon Wegner reported on CAPP's review of reorganization procedures. There are two types of reorganizations: those which go to the BOR and those which are done under delegated authority. The latter, done with delegated authority, do not present provide for faculty input. Given that the BOR acknowledges the value of faculty input, CAPP proposed that faculty participation be included. The resolution was passed by unanimous voice vote. A copy of the resolution is attached to these minutes.

7. Resolution on Student Transfer and Inter-campus Articulation: Bill Lampe reported on CAPP's review of a draft revision of Executive Policy E5.209 on University of Hawaii System Student Transfer and Inter-campus Articulation. He described the document as further adjustments in the ongoing procedure of transferring credits. Nationally the receiving institution is in charge of accepting credits. AT UH, BOR policy calls for maximum degree of coordination and cooperation and faculty involvement in policy making. CAPP requests that the revisions enhance these principles and policies. In general CAPP would like to see more faculty involvement, especially at the department level.

In response to questions, Bill said that under both current and proposed policies it is not Manoa's prerogative to say that a certain course does not transfer. Asked whether the proposal will be acceptable to Community College faculty, Bill said CAPP has addressed this issue and the spirit of transfer procedures, concluding that if faculty get together and talk it usually isn't a problem. Some departments at Manoa and the Community Colleges are already doing this. The proposed changes say that the Community Colleges can make changes, just that a change doesn't automatically satisfy the Manoa core. As long as each campus has authority over its program it would not be automatic that each AA degree meets Manoa requirements. CAPP's view is that this gives each campus and each student more flexibility. CAPP believes that all potential problems would be eliminated through regular procedures for cooperation and coordination and through a really good system for delivering information to students.

The resolution was approved with 22 votes in favor, 3 against, and 5 abstentions. A copy of the resolution is attached to these minutes.

8. Chair's Report: Alex Malahoff congratulated the Senate on its accomplishments during a very difficult year for the University. The Senate looked beyond the budget cuts and he made special note of the Undergraduate Experience Committee's work, the Faculty Ambassadors program, and the establishment of the Admissions Oversight Committee.

9. Next meeting of the Senate is May 13, 1998, at 3:00 in Krauss Hall, Yukioshi Room # 12.

Meeting adjourned at 5:00

Respectively submitted,

Steve Dawson, Secretary


WHEREAS Section 1-10, "Regents' Policy on Faculty Involvement in Academic Decision Making and Academic Policy Development" of the Board of Regents' Bylaws and Policies, states:

"It is the policy of the University to maintain and strengthen organized and systematic involvement by faculty in academic
decision making and policy development." And

WHEREAS there is a historical practice of faculty consultation in the development and review of reorganization proposals, and

WHEREAS Blue Ribbon Panels, Task Forces, unit and campus faculty bodies have all taken part in various reorganizations, and

WHEREAS there have been differences among units in the extent and nature of faculty involvement in the process, and

WHEREAS due to the economic outlook, it is anticipated that many more reorganizations will be proposed, and

WHEREAS it is recognized that reorganization is a fundamental administrative responsibility, but it is noted that specific language consistent with the BOR policy of faculty involvement in decision making and policy development does not appear to be present in the document that outlines the reorganization procedures,

THEREFORE, be it resolved that Section A3.101, "University of Hawaii Organizational and Functional Changes" of the "Guidelines for Processing Organizational and Functional Changes" be revised as follows: [Added language shown in capital letters and bold print]

Change 1: Add sentence to p. 3 of document A3.101 under

5. Reorganization Proposal Requests

A proposal must be prepared for each reorganization to be approved. THE PROPOSAL SHALL BE DEVELOPED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE APPROPRIATE UNIT FACULTY SENATE OR, IN UNITS WHERE NO FACULTY SENATE EXISTS, WITH A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE UNIT FACULTY. This includes those to be approved by the BOR as well as those to be approved under delegated authority. All proposals shall include a narrative and copies of the current and proposed organization and position organization charts, and functional statements. Change 2: Add new paragraph to p 4 of Document A3.101. F. FACULTY EVALUATION 1. INCLUDE AN EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSAL BY THE UNIT FACULTY SENATE OR COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE.


Change 3: Update flow charts, Attachment A and G to reflect these revisions specifying the role for faculty participation.


Resolution from the Committee on Academic Policy and Planning about Student Transfer and Inter-campus Articulation

WHEREAS President Mortimer has called for a review of Executive Policy E5.209 on University of Hawaii System Student Transfer and Inter-campus Articulation, and the System Academic Affairs Council has prepared a draft revision dated 4/3/98, and

WHEREAS the Board of Regents Bylaws and Policies says in Chapter 5 Academic Affairs, paragraph f. on page 5-9,

"The transfer experience should be made as simple and predictable as possible.Unreasonable institutional barriers to transfer should be eliminated." and WHEREAS the draft policy emphasizes making transfer very simple, and "predictability" is best served by providing good information, and students are best served when they are well prepared to transfer, and

WHEREAS the faculty desire that the students be well served and given a solid, well grounded education, and

WHEREAS the Joint Statement on Transfer and Award of Credit adopted by the Council on Postsecondary Accreditation, the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers, and the American Council on Education is Appendix A of Executive Policy E5.209 and this Joint Statement says,

"Basic to this statement is the principle that each institution is responsible for determining its own policies and practices with regard to transfer and award of credit." and WHEREAS the Board of Regents' Policy also says in Chapter 5 Academic Affairs, paragraph f. on page 5-9,

"As a unified system of postsecondary education, it is important that the maximum degree of coordination and cooperation exist among campus instructional units in order to ensure the efficient utilization of available resources." and "All University and campus policies and practices affecting course transfer shall be periodically reviewed to ensure that they are founded on sound academic principles ..." and

WHEREAS coordination and cooperation and such reviews are best facilitated by regular discussion among faculty at the discipline level, and

WHEREAS the University of Hawaii Transfer Agreement dated July 22, 1994 (Appendix B of Executive Policy E5.209) says, "that a primary objective of articulation is to assure that transfer students are prepared for work at their receiving campus," and "that the quality of a degree earned through matriculation at two or more institutions within the system should be comparable to a similar degree earned at a single campus;" and "that the faculty will be directly involved in the process of articulation since they are the experts as to what constitutes comparable course work, and that the faculty will meet regularly with faculty from other campuses to discuss curriculum;" and

WHEREAS Section 1-10, ``Regents' Policy on Faculty Involvement in

Academic Decision Making and Academic Policy Development" of the Board of Regents' Bylaws and Policies, states, "It is the policy of the University to maintain and strengthen organized and systematic involvement by faculty in academic decision making and policy development."


E5.209 be revised

1. to more fully support the provisions of the transfer agreement

2. to emphasize involvement of faculty at various campuses in decisions on articulation and transfer

3. to emphasize coordination and cooperation among faculty at various campuses in order to better serve the students

4. to preserve campus authority over degree requirements

5. to ensure that each course description in each catalogue carry information about transferability of the course to other campuses,



E5.209 be revised to include the attached revisions and in accordance with the attached comments.

Comments on and Revisions to

Executive Policy E5.209 Draft dated 4/3/98

First, the faculty agree that it is extremely desirable to establish a policy to facilitate transfer of students among campuses. Moreover, it is desirable that the policy provide predictability for students anticipating transferring within the University system. Students deserve accurate and timely information about the transferability of their credits in order to make sound educational decisions. A good web-based information system would take care of some of problems and we hope the policy encourages its development.

Second, we agree wholeheartedly with Joint Policy Statement on Transfer and Award of Academic Credit, attached as Appendix A to the existing Executive Policy E5.209. We hope that any revisions reflect the spirit and intent of that policy statement. Importantly, we want to ensure that the receiving institution remains "responsible for determining its own policies and practices with regard to the transfer and award of credit." The receiving institution's interest in determining whether to award transfer credit protects the transfer student from being inappropriately classified and recognizes the receiving institution's obligation to protect its own standards and requirements. The first is essential to the educational success of our transfer students; the second is essential to preserving the quality of each institution and the degrees they confer. We hope that the revised policy will enhance faculty participation in this matter.

Third, we agree with the existing E5.209's intent to ensure faculty an important role in establishing articulation policies and agreements. In practice, however, the faculty has had less of a voice than we believe is appropriate or desirable and therefore are pleased that revisions are underway. We hope that the new policy, from its inception, is collaborative and gives a voice to faculty and departments. We believe that articulation should be occurring at the faculty and departmental level with the executive providing the structure and process to do so. In particular, we hope the procedures in section V are streamlined and enhance faculty involvement.

Fourth, problems can be "solved" by fiat or through cooperation and coordination. The faculty hope that the policy is revised to strongly emphasize cooperation and coordination.

Several specific problems have been brought to our attention, and we hope these will be addressed in the revisions:

1) The currently stated policy that the Associate of Arts degree from a community college satisfies the general education core requirements is too broad. Some AA's may not satisfy the general education core and may contain some non-baccalaureate course work which should not earn credit or satisfy Manoa's core.

2) The policy should ensure that the Manoa Core Committee and the faculty, at the department level, have a regular and key role in making determinations regarding transfer credits, including a course by course articulation among campuses.

3) When the need arises to clarify issues among the colleges concerning implementation of the policy, a process for resolution needs to be stated so that the various campuses do not remain at an impasse.

4) There needs to be a process established for periodic review of articulated courses at the departmental/faculty level to ensure that the list of articulated courses keep apace of curricular changes on the campuses.


1. The UH-Manoa Faculty Senate should appoint three (3) faculty to the University Council on Articulation (UCA).

2. Section V.F. creates standing committees in specific, broad areas and ad hoc committees. This section should also create specific standing committees of faculty in each discipline. These new committees should consist of those faculty having immediate responsibility within their departments or divisions for the undergraduate curriculum in the relevant subject. These committees should handle course articulation and other curricular matters. A majority of the faculty on each committee should come from baccalaureate degree granting campuses. The committees should meet at least once a year.

3. The (new) last paragraph to section II.B.7. should be dropped. Better words could be chosen, and a better idea could be chosen. The emphasis should be on speedy clarification, cooperation and coordination.

4. The words "provided they do not violate a basic campus policy or degree requirement'' are scheduled for deletion from the first sentence of section IV.B.2. These words should be retained.

5. Better yet, section IV.B.2. should be dropped. This section attempts to take care of a specific issue by fiat. It would be better to take care of this issue by articulation, coordination, cooperation, and providing students with good information as to transferability in each course description in each catalogue.

6. Since section IV.B.3. says that an Associate in Arts degree shall be accepted as having fulfilled the general education core at all UH baccalaureate degree granting institutions, there needs to be established a mechanism for coordinating and cooperating on each component of each such degree, and it should be faculty doing the coordination and cooperation on degree requirements, and they should be appointed by their respective faculty senates.

7. Section IV.A.1.c should be dropped because this constitutes a change in admissions policy without faculty oversight or input, and at UH-Manoa faculty oversight of admissions has been established in part in response to the previous WASC accreditation report.

8. Section IV.B.[6]7. should be dropped, and this issue should be handled by cooperation, coordination, and giving students good information.