Skip to content
  • Print

October 9, 2003

University of the Pacific – Stockton Campus
Academic Council Meeting
Minutes of October 9, 2003

R. Hoverstad (p), N. Peery (p)
Conservatory: R. Britten (p), J. Haffner (a), N. Waldvogel (a)
COP: B. Beal (p), D. Borden (p), L. Christianson, (p) C. Dobbs (a), B. Klunk (a), P. Meyer (p), C. Ostberg (a), L. Spreer (p), D. Tedards (p), K. Whittington (a)
Dental: H. Chi (a), J. Levy (a), B. Peltier (a)
Education: M. Draheim (p), V. Snyder (p)
Emeriti: G. Blum (p)
Engineering: A. Fernandez (p), D. Turpin (p)
Law: F. Galves (a), W. Jones (a), G. Scully (p)
Library: R. Imhof (p)
Pharmacy: D. Fries (p), S. Smith-Stubblefield (p), D. Umphred (p)
SIS: C. Smith (a)
Students: L. Nowinski(p), TBD (a)
Ex-Officio: J. Post (a), F. Weins (a), C. Cox (a), C. Eakin (a), A. Freedman (p), P. Gilbertson (p) J. Gonsier-Gerdin (a), K. Hatscheck (a),

Chair Larry Spreer called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m.

1. Approval of Minutes

Motion: G. Blum moved, B. Beal seconded to approve the minutes of September 9, 2003. Motion unanimously approved

2. Conversation with Larry Frederick, Associate Provost/CIO

Pacific Net has been experiencing frequent and sometimes lengthy internal slowdowns and disconnections from the greater Internet. The effect on Pacific is significant. In fact, the cause of all of these problems is viruses, worms, Trojans, remote controllers and other malware. None of these problems are caused by the recent change in Domain Name, from UOP to Pacific, nor are they caused by network staff or staffing levels. Viruses and worms are becoming more virulent and are using new attack vectors. The latest group attacks by flooding the network with traffic, creating a denial of service. While this has recently been largely a student machine issue, no one is immune. As machines become more mobile, connecting to a variety of networks, wired and wireless, the old strategy of a firewall and virus-scanner at the Internet gateway is no longer viable. This is not unique to Pacific. This phenomenon is happening at virtually every university in the country. Like most universities, infected machines at Pacific are identified and isolated from the network for clean-up.

OIT technical staff is working with the community and with external assistance, is making every effort to address this new threat level. For example, OIT is upgrading key network components to better withstand these assaults. However, this effort will not be sufficient. Everyone must help. It is absolutely imperative that all machines be kept up to patch levels, maintained with current anti-virus signature files, be scanned frequently, have critical data backed up frequently and that institutional staff review and test business continuity plans. A slow network may be inconvenient, but loss of data and files could be devastating.

3. Conversation with Sidney Young, Alumni Association President

Ms. Young requested to meet with Academic Council Members to open up communication between Pacific Faculty and Alums. Ms. Young talked about the gratitude and admiration expressed by other Alumni members towards Pacific Faculty, and that most of them come back and are willing to give to Pacific because of those fond memories. An invitation was extended to Academic Council members to the first annual Alumni luncheon on Saturday November 15, 2003, and to future meeting to discuss possible projects with Pacific Faculty, Alums, Students and the Community.

4. Chair’s Report

Pacific budgeted for 730 new students, targeted for 750 and as of 10/1/03 there are 818 new students.

A faculty adhoc committee has formulated Salary Plan II which has been adopted by the University, the administration and the Board of Regents. Salary Plan II compares Pacific to a cohort of western universities with the goal of reaching the average salary in each discipline and rank, taking account of years of service. The Plan is to reach the goals in a 4 year time span Deans will receive an amount of money and decide how much of a raise a faculty member will receive. More detailed information should be given in early November. This raise will become effective in January 2004. This is an adjustable target as when the cohort institutions change salaries so will Pacific change its goals.

Faculty will have a chance to express their concerns about promotion and tenure issues in a series of forums sponsored by the Office of the Provost and Academic Council. The first of these forums will be held in conjunction with COP Council on October 22, 2003 from 3:30 – 5:30. These forums are open to all Faculty. Other forums are scheduled for mid November and one more in February 2004.

5. Professional Relations Committee – Discussion about possible changes in the University Promotions and Tenure Committee membership and procedure

PRC chair Lydia Fox presented the suggested changes to the University Handbook concerning Promotion and Tenure (sections 6.3 and 7.4). Currently the Handbook mixes descriptions of the committee and procedures. A goal of PRC is to separate these. The largest proposed change is in the make up of the committee. Currently there are three faculty, two Deans, one student and the Provost sits as the chair. PRC proposes that the Promotion and Tenure Committee consist of 11 tenured faculty members, 1 from each of the professional schools and 3 from the College, and one student, the Provost would be ex-oficio nonvoting. The PTC would elect the chair of the committee. Staff support would continue to come from the Provost’s office. After discussion with the Academic Council Executive Board an alternative proposal was put. forward 6 tenured faculty, two from the College, two from Stockton Professional schools, one each from the Dental and Law Schools, and one Student. The proposed procedural changes involved a clear statement that all tenure and promotion decisions must be made only by examination of the candidates portfolio which includes the recommendations of the Evaluation Committee, the Chair of the department (or Unit), and the Dean’s recommendations. Any changes or new evidence brought forward must be reviewed by all parties including the Evaluation Committee and the candidate. There was extensive discussion about the make up of the committee. Professor Dave Fletcher from the PRC distributed data he had been able to gather about the make up of the other universities P and T Committees. This data indicated that it was extremely rare to include decanal representation on university PT Committees. Provost Gilbertson described the advantage of having the Deans perspective present during discussion about candidates. There was also extensive discussion about inconvenient delays if any changes or additions to a candidate’s portfolio had to be considered by original Evaluation Committee. It was decided that the Academic Council executive Board, representatives from the Professional Relations Committee and provost Gilbertson would meet to discuss concerns. A formal proposal about changes in the University Handbook description of Promotion and Tenure will be made at a future Academic Council meeting.

6. Faculty Development in Teaching

Chair Spreer talked about our now defunct Center for Teaching Learning and Technology (CTLT), which was started by initiatives from faculty and administrators in the early 90’s. Chair is looking for ways in which Academic Council can come to an agreement on a structure for a new Center for Teaching, with many of the same objectives as the previous center and that it will come as a proposal from Academic Council. Chair Spreer will talk about this in detail at the November AC meeting. question was raised if there is a standing committee to help with the make up of the center, and a suggestion was made that CAPD would be the appropriate committee.

7. Adjournment

Motion: B. Beal moved, M. Draheim seconded to adjourn. Motion unanimously approved. Meeting adjourned at 5:06 p.m.

Respectfully Submitted,

Ana T. Orellana,

Academic Council Secretary