Theme 5 - Advancing Campus & Community Climate

Theme Leads: Gabriela Alvarenga, Jerry EismanDawn-Elissa Fischer, Egon Terplan

This theme will examine the nature of the campus environment and how the campus climate promotes achievement of our institutional goals. Additionally, this theme will evaluate the university’s impact on the surrounding community. Key questions in this area include:

  • What is the status of faculty and staff morale on campus and how might it be improved?
  • What opportunities exist for professional development and growth?
  • Is the campus engaged in adequate succession planning?
  • What is the economic impact of SF State on the city of San Francisco and the surrounding Bay Area?
  • What can we do to further our relationships with local school and community college districts?
  • Are we effectively assessing our community outreach efforts and ensuring that they are consistent with SF State’s core mission?
  • What can we do to improve the cohesiveness of our community outreach activities?
  • Are there opportunities to increase our effectiveness in advocacy efforts with state, local and federal officials?
  • What opportunities exist to leverage our extensive alumni presence in the Bay Area on issues important to the university?

Go to Theme 6 - Elevating Institutional Support

Comments

RE: "This theme will examine the nature of the campus environment and how the campus climate promotes achievement of our institutional goals"

The noise disruption emanating from the new recreation field bordering HUM classrooms and faculty offices (as well as surrounding dorms and residences) is mutually exclusive with a campus environment that supports our institutional goals of quality research, teaching, and learning.

One way to help ensure cohesiveness, potentially enhance positive morale is to bring back the Staff and Faculty lounge. This would be a place where Staff and Faculty can bring their lunch and meet. Students should also be allowed to enter if invited by Faculty &/or Staff. We used to have the U-Club. When I was a student, it was pretty exciting to be invited by Faculty to lunch there. As Staff, it was a great place to just go and chill during lunch. Alumni should also be invited to enter. This would be a great opportunity for monthly alumni events, for example, first Tuesday of the month networking etc.

Faculty morale is very low. With no pay increases for 5 years, and increasing work loads from administrators who never ask our opinion first, working conditions are not good. It would help to have a faculty club, as we did before the library renovations started.

Dear President Wong:

I much appreciate the draft charge of the strategic planning coordinating committee that you have shared with us; thank you.

At a breakfast meeting with you and Provost Rosser, I had questioned the opportunity for academic INNOVATION and SYNERGY through TEAMWORK in what we do-- in terms of who we are, maximizing student success, strengthening the academic and physical master plans, advancing campus and community climate, and elevating institutional support.

The concept of “quality circle” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quality_circle) is interesting, and may be worth exploring for our campus consideration in planning for the future.

Would we be better off if groups, rather than individuals, were the basic building blocks in the design and management of what we do?

This question is posed in Promoting Team Players in the Academic Environment (Halashka); Suppose We Took Groups Seriously (Leavitt), The Design of Work Teams (Hackman), etc.

I serve on several DHHS and NIH committees, and share the following websites which contain good information on "teamwork" or team science:

1) Collaboration and Team Science
https://ccrod.cancer.gov/confluence/display/NIHOMBUD/Home

2) Collaboration and Team Science: A Field Guide
http://ombudsman.nih.gov/collaborationTS.html

“Many institutions have yet to establish mechanisms to review or give credit for team science. For the most part, reward systems are focused on individual accomplishments.
Routine criteria regarding team science for review panels, metrics or milestones for the researcher involved in collaborative work, and policies and procedures to ensure that young investigators are not punished for participating in collaborative teams are lacking. “.

3) Team Science
http://www.niaid.nih.gov/researchfunding/grant/strategy/pages/2teamscien...

Again, thank you for the opportunity to provide comments and share my thoughts with you.

Best

Darlene

Dr. Darlene Yee-Melichar
Professor
Gerontology Program
San Francisco State University
1600 Holloway Avenue (HSS 242)
San Francisco, CA 94132
phone: (415) 338-3558 ~ fax: (415) 338-3556
DYM web: http://userwww.sfsu.edu/~dyee/

That status of faculty and staff morale is low. By all accounts faculty and staff are frustrated and discouraged by the increasing workload and lack of compensation to reflect that increased workload.

I think one of the most serious morale issues and sources of major demoralization for faculty who have already given many years of service to this institution is the very serious issue of salary compression/inversion. The high cost of living is not just an issue that new faculty face, but one that more senior faculty continue to face. New faculty are being hired at salaries that not far behind what full professors who have put in twenty years are making. This cannot result in anything but resentment. Years of no SSIs or GSIs have resulted in a very skewed pay structure. Those hired during certain time periods are hurting the most. There also remain gender inequalities in the pay scale which in this day and age, and at this institution seem inexcusable.

An informal process for conflict resolution at the personnel level would do so much to strengthen the overall climate on campus. Currently, there is nowhere to get help resolving interpersonal issues for faculty or staff. When some sort of facilitation is required, the only options are to file formal grievances. Strained relationships in departments lead to less productivity both in and out of the classroom, less collaboration, and less communication overall. An Ombudsperson on campus would do wonders in terms of elevating campus morale. The low morale is then brought into the classroom and effects student experience.

Division of Undergraduate Studies Response to Strategic Plan Draft Fall 2013

The DUS Council met on September 16 and October 14, 2013 and discussed the draft Strategic Plan. We did not have time to address all of the themes, so limited our discussion to the two themes that resonated most with us (and actually blended into one another). The following are some of our reactions:
Theme 5: Advancing Campus & Community Climate
Much of what is written below essentially comes down to a mis-match of our campus rhetoric and practice. There is a sense that we talk a lot on campus about morale but do nothing about it.
Staff members in particular feel like second-class citizens. We talk about valuing staff, but there are few if any tangible ways that this is expressed on a day-to-day basis. Mistakes have been made in how morale was addressed recently. For example HR’s “Total Rewards” program was presented as a wonderful thing for staff and faculty, but the reality was that it just reinforced/repackaged benefits we already have. This might have been a good approach in times of plenty, but the timing was terrible – at a time when people had gone without raises for years, this seemed out of synch with the pulse of the campus.
Even the services that appear to be valuable often end up being less appealing on second look. For example, the new childcare center on campus was heralded as a wonderful program for parents who work on campus. However, few people on campus make enough money to be able to afford to send their children to the center.
It is hard to manage people when there is no plan in place to even handle cost of living increases, especially in such an expensive area as San Francisco Bay Area. It is difficult to recruit and retain people in such a climate and virtually impossible to get them to want to participate in new initiatives. Employees are constantly being asked to do more with nothing being taken off their plates and with no recognition of or reward for their past efforts. There is little to no room to grow in some career areas at SF State so for many this ends up being an entry-level starting off point and not a place someone wants to spend their career.
Some staff on campus have gone without raises in 8 years and after all this time are being given a 1.34% (or $40/month minimum) raise. This does not improve morale.
Some faculty members in the division feel relief that things are not as bad as they’ve been but feel discouraged in terms of moving forward. They look back to what different times there were 10 years ago. For example, back then GTAs were paid enough to cover tuition plus at least some living expenses. These days GTA pay does no more than cover tuition. Other resources and support that had been available have also disappeared. This means that we are noncompetitive in terms of recruiting graduate students to some programs. Faculty sometimes feel like they are hurting students by accepting them into graduate programs because it seems like we are doing them a disservice by encouraging them to take on crippling debt in a field where they are unlikely to find a lucrative job. This can feel unethical. This situation causes poor morale in both students and faculty and does not provide for as good an educational experience as there once was. Undergraduate students in the sciences in particular are affected because if graduate students aren’t in the program, they cannot serve as mentors in labs to undergraduates. Our campus has lost grant opportunities because we don’t offer fee waivers to graduate students – funding bodies are less interested in providing support if the campus itself doesn’t do so.
Programs that run on soft money do not feel valued and find it difficult to plan for the future. It undermines the ability to do work and morale.
If we as a campus care about student success, we need to support efforts to foster it. If there is no source of money available, perhaps we need to consider requesting a student success fee, as mentioned under Theme 2.
Students are discouraged because the student support services that do exist are stretched to the limit and unable to offer the services they need in a timely manner. This semester there are longer waits than ever before for tutoring and advising services. Thus, although we say such services are important, we are not demonstrating that we value them. Our advising and tutoring offices have noticed increased numbers of depressed and discouraged students who are not able to get the resources and assistance they need and want. At the same time, it’s difficult for our tutoring centers to hire and retain tutors because the starting pay is so low compared with what they can make elsewhere. It feels like a vicious cycle with tutors and the students seeking tutoring both being discouraged. We are limited in what services we can provide, yet the demand is there and therefore students don’t feel supported. Unlike individual courses, there is no real mechanism to say that a student service is “full.” Staff members feel horrible about turning students away who are asking for their help.
There is some concern that the very students we are taking pains to serve are the ones being hurt by this situation. First generation, underrepresented students come to us without the resources and knowledge that other students may have and thus need additional assistance to navigate the maze of higher education. Students also have financial stress, particularly because of the cost of living in the bay area.
Another area where faculty and staff feel unsupported is professional development. There is an expectation that employees will be innovative and think outside the box, yet they are not given the resources and tools to be able to do so. There is little or no money to send people to conferences and no time to assist people in developing new courses and programs. We need centralized support rather than each unit needing to scrape resources together.
Faculty members need information and assistance to help them teach the “new” kinds of courses they are teaching these days. For example, they may have begun their teaching career with courses of 30 students and those courses have increased to 90 or more. It takes different skills and approaches to teach larger courses and yet faculty are expected to figure it our on their own.
Unlike the opening faculty meeting, there is no similar event to introduce new staff to campus and help staff have a sense of community.
More and more of what used to be taken care of centrally now gets put on the backs of individual units, taking away their ability to do the work they were hired to do.
Finally, there is no real community gathering place to help create a collegial atmosphere and to gather and interact comfortably. The Faculty Commons was seen by some to have been presented in a less than welcoming way – with a list of rules rather than as a great opportunity. CSU policies often hinder our ability to create community – from how we can use space to whether we can buy food.
Despite all of this, we have amazing faculty and staff on campus who continually take on more to serve ever more students.

The American Language Institute
SF State College of Extended Learning and International Affairs
Response to Strategic Plan Draft Fall 2013

Theme 5: Advancing Campus and Community Climate

• The status of morale in the ALI program remains consistently strong because of our shared ownership of the mission and well-honed communication systems.

However, many of the permanent staff have worked here for many years and have, thus, not seen an increase in their salaries for c. 6 years. Eventually, this does affect morale, especially as new expectations are set. Faculty and staff provide the university with its reputation for excellence and they should be compensated accordingly.

• We hope our staff can continue to be pro-active and creative and continue to be active members in their profession. This is incumbent on their being able to attend appropriate conferences and workshops. We hope the university will continue to examine ways for faculty and staff to avail themselves of university courses as well.

• As a teacher training institute, the ALI prepares quality English teachers for the local community colleges and universities. These teachers then serve to prepare highly qualified students who join the local workforce.

• NA

• NA

• NA

• The international offices on campus (e.g. ALI, OIP, CEL) must continue to be supported in efforts to have reciprocal contact with agencies who advocate and disseminate information about international students such as NAFSA and TESOL.

• NA

College of Extended Learning and International Affairs’ (CELIA) Leadership Team’s Responses to the Strategic Planning Coordinating Committee Themes

Theme 5 – Advancing Campus and Community Climate

What is the status of faculty and staff morale on campus and how might it be improved?
 Morale is low due to lack of salary increases and stagnant economy
 Create opportunities for teacher, student and staff recognition
 Develop internal committees and conduct regular all-staff meetings to increase communication and forums for giving feedback

What opportunities exist for professional development and growth?
 Professional development is strongly encouraged and included in evaluations
 Conferences and outside resources need to be promoted more
--Is the campus engaged in adequate succession planning?
 Yes. CELIA is working on this at all levels.

What is the economic impact of SF State on the city of San Francisco and the surrounding Bay Area?
 Prepare the work force for employment and leadership
 Provide affordable education to multiple generations within families
 Attract international students
 Deliver community engagement services and support for non-governmental organizations
 Provide applied research to local businesses
 SFSU is a valued local employer

What can we do to further our relationships with local school and community college districts?
 Create partnerships and training programs in public high schools

Are we effectively assessing our community outreach efforts and ensuring that they are consistent with SF State’s core mission?
 Place placards on BART and Muni trains, cars, buses and stations
 Actively market the SFSU brand
 Extend SFSU outreach and SFSU resources to the community

What can we do to improve the cohesiveness of our community outreach activities?
 Have a marketing team based at CELIA
--Are there opportunities to increase our effectiveness in advocacy efforts with state, local and federal officials?
 Need to streamline international student visa processing to so that the visas are secured more quickly

What opportunities exist to leverage our extensive alumni presence in the Bay Area on issues important to the university?
 We are not leveraging these relationships as much as we could
 Create a giving campaign
 Have an advancement staff person assigned to CELIA
 Increase communication and outreach with alumni – create an alumni coordinator for our many international and local students

FEEDBACK ON STRATEGIC PLAN THEMES
from Staff in Academic Resources, Faculty Affairs and
ProfessIonal Development and the Provost's Office

THEME 5Advancing Campus & Community Climate
1Morale is low - no raises, more work, and attrition without staff replacement. Remaining staff often assume the duties of those leaving if there is no replacement hired due to budget constraints.
2Not enough systematic ways to develop as staff.
3Too many limitations on ways to increase salary even with increased job responsibility.
4Very few mechanisms exist for growth as staff professionals.
5What are staff attrition rates? Do we have exit interviews? We should do exit interviews to learn better why faculty and staff are leaving.
6Limited promotion opportunities; staff leave the University.
7Some staff bargaining units have different benefits from others, including anniversary pay bonuses.
8Limited mechanisms to guide/support staff growth (e.g., workshops, training, professional development, fee waiver guidance--what classes to take to lead to promotion)
9More appreciation/support of staff by Managers is needed.
10There is no succession planning.

Academic Technology Staff Strategic Planning Notes
(compiled from four separate listening sessions held in October with all AT staff, facilitated by AVP Brian Beatty and AT Director Maggie Beers)

Theme 5: Advancing Campus and Community Climate

•One thing that impacts staff morale is the bureaucratic issues. I would like to see better cross-division interactions, especially at the senior administrative level. There are small pockets of staff and administrators who want to push through the challenges. We would do better to have more collaboration and cooperation up and down the chain.
•I don’t have the impression that there’s a lot of camaraderie across colleges. In my job I run into barriers because someone above me does not understand my situation—e.g. I do not have control over the type of toner that I get to buy for my unit. However, it would get smoothed out if one AVP talked to another and the director of procurement.
•There are so many moving parts it would be nice to have a big picture, a large strategic vision, and the fortitude to stick with that vision.
•Running enterprise systems means that we are doing a lot of complex organization across teams, which brings up the centralized/decentralized dichotomy. The way the campus is made of silos means it’s challenging to achieve enterprise level since one data point depends on another. There’s a point of frustration around trying to achieve goals of efficiency and effectiveness.
•It would be nice to improve the quality of faculty offices since we do benefit when we have more faculty on campus more often. As someone in a support role, it makes it easier to report issues to them and get feedback from them. I can understand why faculty might want to do contemplative work at home when they can’t do it here.
•The faculty club was a major loss to the university since it was a reason to come to campus. Perhaps we could bring around a hobby shop (MIT, Georgia Tech) for staff. This would be a rapid prototyping lab to explore some interest and develop some new skills. It would provide a different type of interaction between staff and students.
•Morale: It would be helpful to foster a greater global perspective on campus when looking at staff. In the college, IT staff were in a silo away from the university. When the distributed staff members are interested in enterprise issues this engagement is discouraged. I’ve received responses indicating that distributed staff didn’t need to be concerned with enterprise issues.
•It’s important to bring in outside people to give talks, etc. to provide professional development. Staff get applause sometimes, but it feels empty.
•The last president was all about the faculty. This president is all about the students. I love the new president and think that the tone is right, but it seems that the staff continue to be taken for granted. Is this ethical, consistent with “SF State Values”?
•HR needs to come up to par. We need a more comprehensive onboarding process for staff that engages our unit in the process of onboarding. When we have a new person start at our campus, but their benefits are mixed up – taking 6-8 months to start benefits, for example - its unconscionable.
•The staff council could be a way to let staff have a greater voice. Some universities include a staff and/or faculty member on cabinet.
•Staff highlighted the need for plentiful and readily available professional development opportunities:
oStaff lamented that support for professional development depends on the campus climate, which often shifts.
oColleagues from other units report they can only go to one professional development event a year, which is not enough to stay current.
oIt would be good for support staff to go on professional development opportunities along side faculty, so we could partner with them (e.g. teaching and learning with technology).
oThose who do go on PD opportunities need to share experiences with those of us who have stayed behind.
oFaculty and staff could share learning communities, since staff are supporting the faculty.
•There are multiple campus conditions that have contributed to staff members feeling disenfranchised:
oThere has not been a plan for promotion within staff members. If a job is posted between $40K and $70K, what’s the pathway a staff member can follow to ultimately get to $70K? If you come in from the outside you can negotiate at the outset, but not if you are on the inside.
oThe role of the instructional designer needs to be more elevated on campus.
oFaculty and staff organizations, representing SF State, should have the right to have an official university website or presence. It’s off-putting when a group like Raza Faculty and Staff doesn’t have the right to have a website that resides within the University. It seems other universities are proud to have these organizations there, but here this makes the staff feel disenfranchised. The fairly recent decisions to deny staff members the right to teach University courses has left many staff feeling disrespected and alienated from the teaching community. In addition, in the area of Academic Technology, this connection to the teaching world previously served to provide critical insight into the needs and challenges of instructors who use our services and tools and established an important camaraderie.
o The lack of staff raises, coupled with a campus climate that does not show a clear path for advancement, has left staff feeling helpless and undervalued.
oIn times of lean resources, staff recognition becomes all the more important. There are many ways that staff can be recognized and celebrated: by providing funding and opportunities for professional development, hospitality funds for events, ‘star of the month’ or other awards.
oThe University can also show it values staff by providing safer and cleaner environments with augmented custodial service, more ergonomic work stations, and a staff council as a mechanism to provide feedback on staff conditions to the administration.
•Regarding the Children’s Campus:
oChildren’s Campus was originally created to support faculty and staff and it should be a place that the campus can highlight when trying to recruit faculty and staff. However, it seems like another lost opportunity on campus. There isn’t good advertising and enrollment is low.
oI send my kid there, but it bothers me that it costs so much money. It costs much more than places off campus. There isn’t a substantial discount for staff who work here.
oIt costs so much to send my kid there (more than half my paycheck). That is very frustrating.
oThey keep increasing the rates (5% in one year, although staff have not received raises in years). They also just let all the assistant teachers go, so you are paying more for less service.
oOne staff member joked, “What SF State staff member could send their children there?” There are a lot of community people who send their kids there but it’s because they value the SF State experience and they make higher salaries so they can pay. It’s frustrating and bad for morale because we value SF State too, that’s why we work here, but we can’t afford the same childcare.
•Regarding Professional Development:
oEveryone has the opportunity to further themselves in their fields. It is up to them to step forward and make that happen. Some have taken advantage and others have not.
oLynda.com was already available in AT, but now going campus wide is a big improvement.
oYou can take classes in your field, take time off to do that, opportunities to go to trainings off campus if it benefits your work.
oIt is very difficult to sign up for the classes, to get the paperwork processed through HR. The process is not posted, it’s an HR black hole.
oWill there be more money for this now that there is more money in general?
•Moving into the library is a major improvement—better air flow, better restrooms.
•If cellphones worked better in the library (where we work) that would make it easier to stay in touch with family and colleagues.
•Student assistants are not getting paid, the HR system can not cut checks.
•One staff member has tried to get a retirement plan going, they just send them to the papers. It would be good to have someone.
•The EAP program has not been helpful for everyone—one staff member tried to access it for a legal matter and they just transferred them to a ‘discounted’ professional, but it was still $400 and hour which was beyond their reach.
•The lecturers seem more harried because they are running back and forth to different campuses, so they have less time to get our support. Also, they are only here once a week so if they forget to turn something (checked out AV equipment) in, it takes much longer to resolve.
•The faculty old-timers have a lot of TA’s and they rely on them to do the work, so that creates some confusion too.
•When the staff members were teaching they felt like there were too many students and they had to turn many away, which was very painful. They accepted more students than the cap, and that was difficult to give all the students the attention they needed.
•Need more food options on campus - right now the only option available is Stonestown, and it would be good to have the students stay here.
•It’s important to think of a traffic plan now for 19th avenue rather than waiting for 20 years. Perhaps put flashing signs that indicate a pedestrian crossing.
•Staff were not aware of the Tiburon setting (RTC). It’s a beautiful place.
•Put information and images on the website to learn more about RTC, to get a sense of its possibilities. Leverage the beautiful lodge for retreats and meetings. Support may be an issue because whatever you install, you need someone to fix it, repair it, maintain it. We could install remote projectors that can be troubleshot from far away.
•DTC. Important to remember that the closet that supports the cable and network is located on the 5th floor, so we would have to retain that closet or transfer the infrastructure (expensive to move it). There needs to be more comprehensive panning for the technology support downtown. Sure, we can hire someone but if we don’t pay them enough to make them want to stay, or give them enough to challenge them, they may not stay. The campus needs long-term support of the spaces, there has to be a point person there.

Statement on Strategic Planning from the Women and Gender Studies Department:

San Francisco State University has a long and impressive history as an academic and cultural center for our city and as an intellectual and activist catalyst for the nation. This history includes the leadership demonstrated by students, faculty and staff during the Third World Strike of 1968 and continues today through our community partnerships, student organizing, faculty innovations, alumni accomplishments, transnational connections, and the unique character of our campus body. As an institution and a community, we are at our strongest and our best when the administration honors the collective governance of students, staff and faculty. We urge the President and the strategic planning committee to build on these strengths.

A primary historic strength is our campus’s shared mission of social justice. When we reference SFSU’s commitment to “social justice” we are not satisfied with simple rhetorics of diversity, but insist upon a lively intellectual and political engagement with concepts such as citizenship, community, redistribution, equity, and identity. As scholars of women and gender studies, we understand social justice as a project steeped in histories of uneven power relations on local, national and global scales. We understand the importance of historical perspectives, coalitions, and collaborative, strategic decision-making in efforts to move institutions forward, even while under economic or political pressures. In the spirit of our campus mission of social justice and critical participation, the Women and Gender Studies Department offers the following observations and suggestions to the strategic planning effort.

While we understand the logic of dividing such an effort into seven themes, the intersecting issues among the themes required a single response to the critical issues facing our campus today.

Maximizing student success cannot be divorced from issues of institutional support and economic justice: the most pressing concern for our students’ ability to succeed is not only affordability or streamlining academic programs, but fostering the economic conditions that enable students to focus on their studies and not on their subsistence. Student success is not defined by the speed at which students can race through their studies, but by the quality of the education they experience while at SFSU. It is impossible for students to graduate in a timely manner when they are working 20-40 hours per week.

Instead of focusing on increasing philanthropic support we suggest focusing on increasing public support as an institution of public education. This would mean, to start, turning our focus to demanding increased state support; lobbying for increased student grants rather than loans; reducing tuition to levels previous to the budget crisis; and rethinking the full-time requirement for student scholarships and tuition waivers.

The Women and Gender Studies Department supports community partnerships that advocate for economic justice: these include campaigns to increase the minimum wage and to support immigrant rights. When wages are stagnant (locally, statewide, and on campus), students, staff, and faculty cannot excel educationally and professionally. We advocate for the working conditions of and professional respect for SFSU lecturers. We applaud the university’s commitment to undocumented students through its commitment to the DREAM Act and administrative and curricular support for all our students, documented and undocumented. We urge the university’s continuing advocacy for all of our students and the ongoing efforts on campus to make the pathways to both citizenship and residency meaningful by ensuring they are safe, accessible and affordable.

Similarly, the academic master plan is intimately tied to the achievement of our institutional goals and our impact on the community. Every day, SF State faculty, administrators, staff, alumni, and students are doing amazing work. We do not need to reinvent academic programs, but rather support and promote the outstanding work already being done at SF State. Community impact should be measured not only through “economic impact” and “morale” but also through the production of knowledge generated by the research and creative projects of faculty. The contributions of our alumni to their community are meaningful and substantial in not just fiscal terms but also non-monetary terms, including creative art, political leadership, community involvement, and engaged professional development.

Faculty research is crucial to the health of a university environment. After years of diminished resources and loss of CSU grants for research and professional development, faculty morale and student success would be improved not through superficial changes (such as the promotion of university songs or color days), but by the reinstallation of assigned time for research, the replacement of lost library books and cancelled scholarly journal subscriptions, smaller class sizes, and increased numbers of tenure-track faculty positions. Our students will succeed with excellent teachers who are professionally supported, not bureaucratically over-taxed, and when they can study and work in a physical environment which supports their studies, and when they receive consistent advising from faculty who are not working other jobs to pay their bills and keep their dependents afloat. Faculty professional activities are not simply the means by which to increase university “prestige,” but rather provide vital connections to intellectual, creative, cultural, and political projects that also makes SFSU faculty more inspired and inspiring teachers. The reshuffling of departments and programs in the recent past has neither saved money, nor served our students, nor increased the academic reputation of our institution. Creating conditions in which our outstanding faculty, students, and staff can do their jobs less encumbered by unnecessary obstructions will strengthen our university by facilitating the knowledge-production and cultural work of faculty and the quality education provided to our students. Such supports will undoubtedly positively impact our students’ success rates and the reputation of SFSU as an outstanding institution of higher education.

We are proud to be members of the SF State community and to carry its mission of social justice forward. In this commitment, we look forward to continuing to build our institution in partnership with President Wong, our students, the SF State alumni, and our colleagues.

Nan Alamilla Boyd, Professor
Deborah Cohler, Associate Professor and Chair
Julietta Hua, Associate Professor
AJ Jaimes Guerrero, Professor
Kasturi Ray, Assistant Professor
Jillian Sandell, Associate Professor
Evren Savci, Assistant Professor
Lisa Tresca, Office Manager

Alumni, current staff and community members sometimes value greatly the benefit of living in "a college town." It would be interesting if lecture classes which may have universal appeal could be open to the community to attend, enjoy the lecture and thus make a determination if a resumption of academic training could benefit them, in their jobs or in their retirement. Also, if one class could be made available to such a community member per semester at a reduced rate, this might increase the "social capital" of being associated with a university as a community partner, and thus be more motivation for making a donation to make this involvement continue. Thanks.

Theme 5 – Advancing Campus & Community Climate

1.To support advancing the campus and community climate, faculty need to be aware of student mental health issues and how to approach and support students around these issues. Therefore, counselor faculty recommend creating and implementing guidelines to make mental health training part of orientation for incoming faculty to help them develop skills and develop approaches to respond to mental health challenges in the classroom or their offices, and to continue to make available to all faculty ongoing mental health trainings. We suggest these ongoing trainings take place at annual departmental faculty meetings.

2.Regional mental health outreach and education supports advancing campus and community climate, thus counselor faculty recommend including the vision and allocation of resources for such outreach/education in the SFSU strategic plan. For example, in October of 2013, Counseling & Psychological Services at SFSU hosted a regional suicide prevention conference entitled “We all matter: Creating a community of caring.” Events such as this one foster a sense of community and inclusion on campus while engaging the campus with the community professionals and public in the Bay Area in discussion and education about important issues that affect both our students and the communities in which they live.

Morale for faculty and staff are low. We need more team building courses or type of seminars to help staff and faculty stay motivated to help our University to stay positive. SFSU staff and faculty salaries are often compared to the non profit organizations as being very low. In the past I remember CSU staff use to get a percentage increase in salary yearly. Many people looked forward to that increase and it made working at CSU good besides for benefits. In today's living everything has increased food, gas, housing and just living, however CSU budget has not been able to increase salaries maybe only by 1.34 and staff CSUEU are still awaiting an increase effective in March 2014, we hope.

Morale for faculty and staff are low. We need more team building courses or type of seminars to help staff and faculty stay motivated to help our University to stay positive. SFSU staff and faculty salaries are often compared to the non profit organizations as being very low. In the past I remember CSU staff use to get a percentage increase in salary yearly. Many people looked forward to that increase and it made working at CSU good besides for benefits. In today's living everything has increased food, gas, housing and just living, however CSU budget has not been able to increase salaries maybe only by 1.34 and staff CSUEU are still awaiting an increase effective in March 2014, we hope. Forming relationships with other schools and community colleges is important to keep SFSU the place to attend college. Increasing attending career fairs at high schools and community colleges. Step to college courses offered at high schools to motivate students to go to college and to want to attend SFSU. Example, critical thinking courses taught at the college or high school and give University credit when completed. This will help students to start attending college tours. Programs EOP, La Raza, other student organizations is excellent resources that motivate students to attend college and stay in college.

Morale for faculty and staff are low. We need more team building courses or type of seminars to help staff and faculty stay motivated to help our University to stay positive. SFSU staff and faculty salaries are often compared to the non profit organizations as being very low. In the past I remember CSU staff use to get a percentage increase in salary yearly. Many people looked forward to that increase and it made working at CSU good besides for benefits. In today's living everything has increased food, gas, housing and just living, however CSU budget has not been able to increase salaries maybe only by 1.34 and staff CSUEU are still awaiting an increase effective in March 2014, we hope. Forming relationships with other schools and community colleges is important to keep SFSU the place to attend college. Increasing attending career fairs at high schools and community colleges. Step to college courses offered at high schools to motivate students to go to college and to want to attend SFSU. Example, critical thinking courses taught at the college or high school and give University credit when completed. This will help students to start attending college tours. Programs EOP, La Raza, other student organizations is excellent resources that motivate students to attend college and stay in college.
I think we should have a staff retreat yearly and a also a student success day with bag lunch given to help show appreciation to all students, staff, and faculty.

We think it would be beneficial to offer professional development for staff ($5k per year minimum) and to provide more career advancement opportunities for staff who have recently completed advanced degrees. Meaning, there needs to be career initiatives for staff members who pursue advanced level degrees while working full time, which takes ongoing perseverance and commitment. After completion of a degree program, staff members should be given an opportunity to explore leadership roles with a supervisor to pursue higher level positions. SF State should admit and recruit more male minorities on campus, so they may develop educational and career opportunities. SF State should provide student commuter discounts and initiatives. These advancements to our campus will promote achievement of our institutional goals. –Posted by DPRC employee on behalf of DPRC