RUTGERS UNIVERSITY SENATE

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

MEETING AGENDA

Friday, November 7, 2025, 9:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. via Zoom

Chair’s Report– Lucille Foster, Senate Chair

Secretary’s Report– Morgan Smith, Senate Administrative Assistant

• Approval of Agenda
• Approval of the October 3, 2025 Senate Executive Committee Minutes
• Policy Updates
  • 10.3.3 Policy on Special Student Organization Funding – Updated and posted
  • 80.1.7 Rutgers University Website Policy – Updated and posted
• Communications
  • Qualtrics survey results
  • Spring 2026 Senate Social- Rutgers Club Feb. 27 12:00 – 2:00 p.m.
  • Website Updates- Ad hoc committees in process to be updated
  • Social Media Subcommittee of EC-Volunteers
  • Libraries response to S:2305-Auditing Courses at Rutgers
  • Executive Committee Newark Student Vacancy

Executive Committee Newark Student Representative

Senate Social and Merchandise

Listserv Communications – Senator Ashleie Gordy

Academic Freedom Group Update  

Discussion- Chancellor Brian Strom, RBHS (10:00 – 10:20 a.m.)

Standing Committees/Panels

Proposed Charge

School to School Transfer Issues – Senator Martha Haviland, Faculty-New Brunswick and Non-Senator Sofia Pinto-Figueroa, Staff-Newark

Charge: Examine (i) the existing policies, procedures, and practices that govern school-to-school and campus-to-campus transfers within the university, and (ii) the challenges that currently enrolled undergraduate students face when seeking to transfer to another Rutgers program outside of their school of enrollment. Recommend strategies and considerations, as appropriate, to ensure that the transfer process is transparent, accessible, and easily understood by all students.

Rationale: Applicants to Rutgers University may select multiple schools for admission consideration. Many students are not admitted to their first-choice school, and in some cases, applicants to schools at Rutgers–New Brunswick may be considered for admission to schools on the Rutgers–Newark or Rutgers–Camden campuses. Students who enroll at a school other than their top choice may do so with the expectation that they will have an opportunity to apply for a transfer after completing a semester or more at Rutgers.While many students remain at their initially enrolled school throughout their academic careers, others may seek to transfer to another school – either to pursue a specific academic program not offered at their current school or to better align with their academic or career goals. These transfers may occur within a campus (inter-school or intra-campus transfers) or between campuses (inter-campus transfers). Anecdotal reports from students, including student-athletes, suggest that the transfer process, particularly for school-to-school transfers within Rutgers–New Brunswick and campus-to-campus transfers to Rutgers–New Brunswick, can present challenges. Reported issues include a perceived lack of transparency regarding transfer criteria, limited clarity about decision-making processes, and instances of transfer denials without detailed explanations. At the same time, it is recognized that individual schools and campuses operate within constraints such as enrollment capacity, accreditation standards, and resource limitations that may affect their ability to accept all qualified transfer applicants. A clear understanding of these processes and constraints, and the identification of potential areas for improved communication and consistency, can help ensure that transfer policies support both institutional goals and student success across Rutgers University.

Proposed Charge

Senate Leadership Self-Study on Functioning and Governance Practices– Senator Anna Haley, Faculty-New Brunswick and Senator Paul Boxer, Faculty-Newark

Charge: The Senate Executive Committee (EC), in collaboration with the Senate’s University Structure and Governance Committee, will conduct a self-study of Senate leadership functioning with the goal of improving communication, transparency, and collective decision-making.

Rationale: The elected leadership of the Rutgers University Senate – including Chair, Vice Chair, and members of the Executive Committee –holds a distinct responsibility to model the principles of transparency, accountability, and shared governance that guide the Senate’s work. Recent discussions have highlighted opportunities to strengthen leadership functioning and clarify procedures in several key areas: how information and decisions are communicated among Senate leaders and with University administration; how fiscal resources are allocated and managed; and how leadership decisions reflect shared consultation within the Executive Committee and the broader Senate. A structured self-study will allow an examination of Senate leadership practices systematically, identify areas for improvement, and reinforce trust in the Senate as an exemplar of shared governance.

Proposed Charge

Review and Clarification of the Educational Benefits (Tuition Remission) Policy for Rutgers Employees- Chazz Fellenz, Non-Senator, Staff, Newark

Charge: I would like for the committee to examine the current policy 60.2.1 Educational Benefits, specifically the section governing tuition remission eligibility for graduate and professional programs. The review should focus on: Clarifying which programs are considered eligible or ineligible, particularly in relation to online and hybrid degree programs created after July 1, 2013. Assessing whether the policy language is transparent and easily understood by employees, especially newer staff. Evaluating whether the policy’s intent, to support and encourage continuing education and professional development among Rutgers employees, remains aligned with the university’s evolving academic landscape, which now includes a wide range of online and hybrid offerings. Recommending updates or supplemental guidance to ensure consistency, accessibility, and equity across all campuses and employee groups. Consideration for removal of programs created prior to July 1, 2013.

Rationale: Tuition remission remains one of Rutgers University’s most valued employee benefits, offering staff and faculty the opportunity to pursue further education and professional growth within the institution. However, the current Educational Benefits policy includes a clause limiting eligibility to “academic programs that were established by and contained within Rutgers University prior to July 1, 2013.” As written, this language can be confusing for employees, particularly newer staff, who may not have the means to determine which programs were established before or after that date, or whether online or hybrid programs qualify. Recently, a staff member enrolled in an online master’s program, believing it would be covered, only to later discover it was ineligible under this clause, resulting in a financial hold mid-semester. Despite the fact that the in-person program is the same exact program, just in person. This situation highlights the need to revisit the clarity and intent of the policy to prevent similar hardships and to ensure that tuition remission continues to serve as an equitable and accessible benefit in an era of increasingly digital academic offerings. A Senate review and recommendation process could help strengthen transparency, consistency, and employee confidence in this important benefit.

Proposed Charge

Forced Merger of Criminal Justice and Sociology Department (Rutgers, NB) –Non- Senator, Michael Welch, Faculty-New Brunswick

Charge: Attached is a memo (17 May 2025) that I sent to Executive Dean Wade (and Area Dean Robin Leichenko), concerning the (coerced) merger between Criminal Justice and the Department of Sociology. As of 10 October (2025), I have not received a response from either of them. Also attached is an update on other related developments (12 October 2025). The essence of the problem revolves around a proposal that was prepared in bad faith without sufficient transparency, leaving CJ faculty uninformed about the plans to merge with Sociology. Moreover, the merger was developed while Professor Michael Welch (founding member of CJ), was overseas on sabbatical at the University of Sydney in year 2024. Complicating matters, CJ faculty were unaware that Alec Walen had assumed the role of “Deputy Director of Strategic Planning.” Walen is neither a Social or Behavioral Scientist. Actually, he is on faculty at the Law School at Rutgers, Camden. Merger report. Update.  

Rationale: This charge requests that the Senate thoroughly investigate the matter. So as to reconcile the objections of the Criminal Justice faculty who oppose the merger, we recommend that the Senate declare the merger invalid until alternative plans can be explored. For years, I have recommended to the Executive Dean to have the CJ major evaluated by the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, our leading advisory group. The ACJS recommends that all CJ Departments in the nation be assessed every five years. That last time ACJS evaluated the undergraduate program at Rutgers (NB) was in 1996. At stake is a host of problems that have an enormous negative impact on CJ faculty and staff as well as our 600 undergraduate students majoring in Criminal Justice (Rutgers, NB).

Open Charge Request

ITC requests further information on the background and origins on charge:

S-2504: Implementation of Electronic Student ID Access via Mobile Credentials

• Can the EC provide more information on the background and origins of this charge?  (i.e., What were the circumstances that led to this proposed charge?)
• ITC members recommended revising the language of this charge to better align with the committee’s scope and authority.  Specifically, the ITC does not possess the authority or resources to ‘develop and deploy,’ and therefore such terminology may need to be reconsidered.

Open Charge Request

FPAC requests a clarification on charge:

S-2313-1 Cost Cutting and Budget Deficits

Currently, the charge reads:

Pending BFC‘s investigation into outcomes of cost cutting measures that are being imposed on departments by their schools, FPAC will investigate departments’ responses with particular focus on manifestations and impacts on faculty and staff.

The BFC’s charge reads:

Identify cost cutting measures that are being imposed on departments by their schools. Investigate the budgetary rationales for these cuts and their impact on the quality of academic programs.

• Is there any additional language to the charge that we should be aware of?
• Can we be provided with background or context as to how this charge was initiated?

Open Charge Request

Ad Hoc Committee to Investigate Current Trends and Issues Regarding Federal Landscape Changes Impacting University Operations requests updates:

• Name change to Rutgers MADC Taskforce
• Updated charge language:This ad hoc committee/taskforce was established in April 2025 in response to the Senate MADC Resolution approved on March 28, 2025. Its purpose is to advance the principles of mutual academic defense for Rutgers University – including collaborative and coordinated protection of Rutgers’ and other higher education institutions’ academic freedom, institutional integrity, and the research enterprise amid a changing federal and state landscape.

The taskforce continues that work by engaging Rutgers leadership, including the University President, Board of Governors, and senior administrators, to explore and principles and practices consistent with mutual academic defense aligned with Rutgers’ core values and strategic interests. The committee also collaborates with shared governance leaders at other New Jersey colleges and universities to build a statewide higher education coalition (NJ-MADC) that strengthens collective defense of academic freedom and representative governance; the Senate approved a resolution joining this body on October 17, 2025. In addition, it supports internal communication and educational efforts within Rutgers to deepen understanding of mutual academic defense principles and the University’s role in advancing them.

Old Business

None.

New Business

Adjournment