Skip to main content

Senate - Administration Partnership

Under the UC shared governance model, we work closely with the Academic Senate to address campus-wide issues. Our joint senate-administration workgroups perform in-depth analyses and provide recommendations that inform efforts to continuously improve our organizational policies and processes, and develop a more supportive university infrastructure. Visit the Senate's website ( for information about issues under review as well as reports and recommendations from committees and workgroups. The following are a summary of recent work completed by workgroups and task forces.

2022 - SIO Ad Hoc Task Force on Space Allocation

  • 2022 - SIO Ad Hoc Task Force on Space Allocation

    The SIO Ad Hoc Task Force on Space Allocation was formally charged by Chancellor Pradeep K. Khosla, Executive Vice Chancellor Elizabeth H. Simmons and Vice Chancellor for Marine Sciences Margaret Leinen on May 4, 2022, to better understand space allocations and space-allocation policies, processes, and procedures at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California San Diego, with the goal of assessing possible gender inequities. The task force's final report was issued on January 17, 2023. 

2022 - Workgroup on Undergraduate Climate Change Education for All

  • 2022 - Workgroup on Undergraduate Climate Change Education for All

    In Spring 2021, the San Diego Divisional Senate’s Committee on Campus Climate Change (CCCC) drafted a Climate Change Education for All Resolution proposing that the campus require climate change education for all undergraduate students at UC San Diego. The resolution was discussed by Senate Council and the Undergraduate Council, and it was recommended that a Senate-Administration Workgroup be formed to further explore possible models and make a recommendation on the specifics of a climate change requirement.

    In the background materials that the CCCC provided with the proposed resolution, three course typologies were presented as possible models for requiring courses that cover climate change:

    1. Courses on climate change that fulfill existing college general education requirements and electives;
    2. Discipline-specific courses on climate change that can be applied towards major or minor requirements;
    3. Existing courses in which faculty develop new lectures, assignment or examples to infuse topics of climate change into the existing syllabus.

    In the charge document, the workgroup is tasked with developing a proposal for a Bachelor’s degree requirement for all undergraduate students to complete coursework in climate change and consider whether there are means to promote climate change awareness and action among students, in addition to, or even instead of, a proposed course requirement. They will also evaluate the typologies referred to in the background materials and determine if any of the models can be scaled up for all undergraduate students to satisfy a climate change education requirement and consider if there are alternative models for designing a climate change education requirement.

    The workgroup is expected to deliver their recommendations and steps needed to operationalize any proposed course requirement by September 2022. 





2021 - Holistic Graduate Funding Task Force

  • 2021 - Holistic Graduate Funding Task Force

    As a university, we aspire to get to a place in which the various forms of support for our doctoral and MFA students are calculated and allocated in a straight-forward and predictable manner that allows students (and departments) to understand what their funding will look like over the course of their time at UC San Diego.

    Implementing recommendations from the Senate Administration Workgroup on Graduate Funding helped make significant progress in this direction, by establishing standards for the minimum number of years of support and minimum level of support, as an example.

    In March 2021, UC San Diego announced a commitment to further improve financial support to make graduate admissions offers more competitive, as well as to enhance the diversity and success of students in our graduate programs. Having implemented a number of reforms to specific parts of the graduate funding model, the Holistic Graduate Funding Task Force was convened and charged with reviewing summer opportunities and doctoral and MFA support, with two specific goals:

    1. Elucidate the present situation: What resources does the university presently allocate to graduate support? How do we package these into different forms like “block grant” or “diversity fellowships”? How do the funds get delivered to the students?

    2. Make recommendations on the following potential areas for improvement: How can we make the packaging and delivery of the funds more transparent, streamlined, and rational? How can we reconfigure the allocated resources to ensure more of them go toward graduate stipends?

    Holistic Graduate Funding Task Force Basic Principles and Specific Tasks


    In December 2021, the Graduate Division released a summary of the task force’s recommendations and announced a new approach to advancing graduate program competitiveness and diversity. The task force’s recommendation related to a fixed allocation of diversity incentive money has been launched. The second element of the new two-pronged approach needs to undergo formal Academic Senate review before implementation is finalized.

    Summary and status update of the task force’s recommendations.

2021 - Workgroup on Distance Education for Academic Excellence and Resilience

  • 2021 - Workgroup on Distance Education for Academic Excellence and Resilience

    During Summer 2020, a Senate Task Force on Remote Learning Long-Term Policies and Strategies and the Administration’s Educational Continuity Task Force were convened to make short- and long-term recommendations arising from the impacts of COVID-19 on instruction. In order to build on the efforts of these two task forces, and in light of the university’s experience in dealing with the global pandemic, a Senate-Administration Workgroup on Distance Education for Academic Excellence and Resilience was convened during Winter Quarter 2021.

    The workgroup was charged with developing recommendations for how distance education can help UC San Diego deliver high-quality educational opportunities, provide more flexible options to meet diverse faculty and student needs, and strengthen organizational resilience to uphold the university’s teaching, research, and service mission in dynamic contexts.  

    Charge for Senate-Administration Workgroup on Distance Learning for Academic Excellence and Resilience


    The workgroup drafted its report and shared some of its preliminary recommendations related to Summer 2022 instruction with administrative and Senate leaders. The workgroup is expected to finalize and present its report by Fall Quarter 2022.

    Workgroup Proposal for Remote Instruction in Summer Session 2022 and Academic Senate’s Responses

2021 - Academic Advancement in the Wake of COVID-19

  • 2021 - Academic Advancement in the Wake of COVID-19

    The Senate-Administration Workgroup on Academic Advancement in the Wake of COVID-19 was empanelled in Spring Quarter 2021 and charged with assessing the short- and long-term impacts of the ongoing public health response to the COVID-19 pandemic on research, teaching, work/life balance - equity, diversity and inclusion, and the academic review process at UC San Diego. Discussions about service, which was part of the initial charge, were included, either directly or tangentially, on each of the aforementioned committees. 


    The workgroup submitted their report on June 11, 2021. Their report included a summary of actions taken, to-date (June 2021) by UC San Diego in response to COVID-19, as well as COVID-19 benefits and programs for eligible academics. Additionally, the workgroup provided some guiding principles for the university to follow to limit negative impacts of COVID-19 on faculty careers. Among the group's recommendations for reducing the short-term impact of COVID-19, were assessing faculty achievements relative to opportunity, enabling fair and equitable assessment of performance relative to the opportunities won or lost due to COVID-19; offering flexibility to the October 15 file cut-off date for career review actions; allowing academic appointees who were appointed between July 1, 2020 and June 30, 2021 to request a pandemic-related extension to the probationary perion; providing resources and programs to enable recovery of research programs/trajectories for eligible faculty and emphasizing best practices in teaching in the post-COVID-18 environment by engaging with pedagogical experts and offering workshops in coordination with the Teaching and Learning Commons.

    Report of the Senate-Administration Workgroup on Academic Advancement in the Wake of COVID-19

2020-21 - Workgroup on Establishing Eighth College

  • 2020-21 - Workgroup on Establishing Eighth College

    UC San Diego’s college system

    is a critical component of the university’s mission and values; these academic units combine the academic advantages of a large research university with the support features of a small liberal arts college. Each of the undergraduate colleges has its own general education curriculum, campus neighborhood, residence facilities, staff, traditions, and distinctive educational philosophy. UC San Diego continues to establish new colleges in response to increasing student enrollment and anticipated growth.

    Eighth College Proposal Workgroup Charge

    In 2020, a workgroup chaired by the dean of undergraduate education was charged with overseeing the process to establish an eighth college, including developing the college theme and general education sequence and then producing the full proposal for local and systemwide review. The workgroup played a crucial role in the planning of this important institution and informed the process for college planning more broadly.  Included in the proposal is an articulated vision of how the college will address structural racism and anti-Blackness through an Engagement & Community theme.  The proposal has been approved by the Divisional Senate, System-wide Senate, UC Office of the President, and the UC Board of Regents.

    Proposal for an Eighth Undergraduate College at UC San Diego (November 2021)



2021 - Workgroup on Establishment of a DEI Program

  • 2021 - Workgroup on Establishment of a DEI Program

    A report from the Senate-Administration Workgroup on the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) requirement and discussions with the Academic Senate identified a need to establish a mechanism that would enable the periodic evaluation of the undergraduate degree requirement originally established by the Academic Senate in 2011.

    Co-chaired by the dean of undergraduate education, the Senate-Administration DEI Program Task Force was convened in winter 2021, and charged with recommending a structure responsible for overseeing the academic mission of the DEI course requirement.

    Charge of DEI Program Task Force


    The task force shared a preliminary version of its proposal in spring 2021. Based on feedback from stakeholders, the proposal was revised in May 2021 and distributed for a second round of consultation. 

    The final proposal was submitted to the divisional Senate in winter 2022 and is currently in the review stage.

    Proposal for a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Program at UC San Diego

2020 - Budget Planning Guidance

  • 2020 - Budget Planning Guidance

    The public health emergency caused by the COVID‐19 pandemic has had significant impacts at the national, state, and local levels. One result was a significant budget reduction at UC San Diego.  To guide the academic divisions and other units in Academic Affairs, EVC Simmons charged a broadly constituted task force with developing principles by which budget reductions in the academic divisions could be implemented.  Their recommendations formed the basis for the budget reduction plans created by the academic divisions.

    Report of the Summer General Campus Task Force on Budget Planning (SSO required) 

2020 - Workgroup on the Evolution of Extension

  • 2020 - The Evolution of Extension

    In Spring 2020, the Evolution of Extension Discussion Group was charged with studying current programs and services within UC San Diego's Extension to identify existing, nascent or future collaborative opportunities that aligned with university priorities, examine how Extension units were operating in peer institutions and identify methods and partnerships that could be adapted for UC San Diego, identify significant operational challenges to bringing the first two charges to fruition and form recommendations regarding next steps for greater partnership between Extension and other academic units on campus. The group was tasked with submitting a draft report by week 5 of Winter Quarter 2021, and a final report by the end of Winter Quarter 2021. 

    Charge of Evolution of Extension Discussion Group


    The discussion group submitted its report in winter 2020. In addition to enumerating the strengths and challenges of Extension, the report also examined potential collaborative opportunities for the unit, taking advantage of complementary strengths to support programming and outreach in areas of institutional focus and aligning systems and structures to capture economies of scale and scope where possible.

    The report also outlined three priorities for the path forward for Extension:

    1. Building the foundation for closer integration and driving immediate impact by addressing some of the most pressing impediments to collaboration and initiate or amplify growth efforts in areas of strategic urgency. 
    2. Building Extension and institutional alignment by strengthening faculty relationships and establishing closer structural alignment between Extension and campus units where there are costs or risks in sustained lack of connection. 
    3. Building the capacity for strategic growth by equipping Extension to play an expanded role across the campus as it continues to work with partners to advance collaborations. This could include enhancing its visibility and promoting a shared vision for Extension, informed by its strategic plan. 


    Evolution of Extension Discussion Group Findings and Recommendations 


2019-20 - Faculty Workload

  • Faculty Workload

    Faculty are periodically reviewed for merit and promotion advancement based on their scholarly activity (research and/or creative activity), teaching, both University and professional service, and contributions to diversity. There is considerable variation across campus regarding departmental standards in each of these areas.In some cases, departments have developed internal workload standards that provide broader holistic metrics of faculty engagement. In these cases, there are points assigned to departmental teaching (undergraduate and graduate), service, and graduate student mentoring activities. In addition, teaching is not just quantified by number of courses, but by enrollment as well.

    This workgroup convened in 2019 and was originally charged to document departmental workload standards, consult departments on workload standards in the overall context of the university, and recommend a process through which workload standards may be modified. 

    Report of the Senate-Administration Workgroup on Faculty Workload 


    This workgroup reconvened in 2020 with a supplemental charge to develop university principles on equitable service expectations as well as standardized and consistent guidelines to advise departments on how to account for the work of their faculty. 

    Response to supplemental charge for Senate-Admin Workgroup on Faculty Workload

2019 - Workgroup on Establishing Seventh College

  • 2019 - Workgroup on Establishing Seventh College

    In Winter Quarter 2017, the joint Seventh College Planning Task Force was charged with answering core questions necessary for launching and securing system-wide approval for a new college that would help address the university’s growing undergraduate enrollment pressures. The recommendations provided by the task force would inform the next stages of planning, including the development of a detailed academic plan for the college, search for its founding provost, and preliminary considerations for an eighth college.

    Charge of Seventh College Planning Task Force


    The joint task force submitted its report to Senate and administrative leadership in spring 2017. Following additional university-wide consultation, a pre-proposal to establish the seventh college was submitted for formal Senate review in fall 2017. The pre-proposal was approved by the UC San Diego divisional Senate, Academic Council, and UC Office of the President during the Winter and Spring quarters of 2018.

    Given the expeditious timeline for launching a new college, the process for developing and approving a detailed academic plan ran in parallel with the approval process for establishing the college. Following approval of the pre‐proposal, a workgroup convened in summer 2018 to develop the proposal for local and system-wide review. The proposal to establish a seventh undergraduate college at UC San Diego was submitted and approved over the course of the Spring Quarter 2019.

    Report of Seventh College Planning Task Force

    Pre-Proposal for Seventh Undergraduate College

    Proposal for a Seventh Undergraduate College at UC San Diego

2019 - Holistic Teaching Evaluation

  • Holistic Teaching Evaluation

    This workgroup was originally charged in 2019 with developing recommendations that would allow the university to: Identify and make available multiple existing tools for teaching evaluation; establish a campus culture where both formative and summative assessment of teaching and learning is standard practice and institute or augment faculty development programs.

    Report of the Senate-Administration Workgroup on Holistic Teaching Evaluations


    Recognizing that a shift to holistic teaching evaluation represents a major culture shift, both the workgroup and the Senate Council recommended the formation of a committee to oversee the process. Thus, a Senate-Administration Holistic Teaching Evaluation Implementation Task Force was convened in Fall 2020 and charged with identifying processes for formative assessments and summative evaluations and developing the necessary infrastructure to move forward with portfolio reviews as the main method of evaluating teaching effectiveness. In addition, the task force will also suggest ways in which the Teaching + Learning Commons may assist with the teaching evaluation process, without participating in individual evaluations.

    Report on Holistic Teaching Evaluation Implementation 

2018-19 - Graduate Funding

  • Graduate Funding

    This workgroup convened in 2018-19 and was charged with proposing alternative graduate funding allocation methods that will (1) be fiscally sustainable, (2) better align the pedagogical demands of graduate and undergraduate education, (3) ideally provide graduate students with a minimum stipend and sufficient time for dedicated scholarship and (4) allow additional graduate students to be access extramural funds. 

    Report of the Senate-Administration Workgroup on Graduate Funding 


    Since the release of the report, the university has undertaken a comprehensive reform of graduate student funding to improve transparency and enhance financial support for Doctoral and MFA students.   

    The Graduate Division has created a collaborative resource to share information about these strategic efforts, including a summary of the overall implementation plan. Please visit their collab site for campus partners for details, including all major communications related to this topic and answers to frequently asked questions.  

2018-19 - Policies and Practices for Teaching Professors

  • Policies and Practices for Teaching Professors

    This workgroup convened in 2018-19 and was originally charged to undertake a study and provide a set of recommendations about how UC San Diego might change its local practices and PPM policies not mandated by APM requirements or non-PPM policies in ways that better support teaching professors and provide appropriate guidance to unit leaders. 

    Report of the Senate-Administration Workgroup on Policies and Practices related to Teaching Professors


    In response to the recommendations from this workgroup, the university is making changes to policies and practices that will lead to greater equity in compensation and appointments, academic reviews, and teaching expectations for ladder rank and teaching faculty. One of the steps involves training department chairs and academic personnel staff on best practices for working with the teaching professor series.  A more tangible outcome is currently underway to regularize the appointment and academic review processes between the teaching faculty and ladder rank faculty regarding the delegation of certain actions to dean’s authority.

2018-19 - Faculty Recruitment

2017 - Abusive Conduct and Bullying by Faculty

  • Abusive Conduct and Bullying by Faculty

    In 2017, a workgroup was charged with providing recommendations to improve the communication of existing campus policies and processes related to bullying or changes to university policies to ensure UC San Diego is operating in accordance with best practices for higher education. This group was convened after reports by Senate members of incidents of bullying by faculty that did not appear to be satisfactorily resolved.  

    Report of the Senate-Administration Workgroup on Bullying


    In the time since the workgroup made its recommendations, we have had the benefit of learning from peer institutions that have initiated formal processes for addressing allegations of bullying. Their experiences demonstrated the need to educate our university community about the standards of acceptable conduct and provide resources to support leaders in responding to allegations of inappropriate behavior by faculty.  

    Academic Personnel Services (APS) has shared resources related to abusive conduct and bullying, including general guidance for administrative leaders and anti-bullying resources for faculty. Department chairs may also contact AP staff to request a detailed Abusive Conduct Toolkit for Administrators, and this topic is addressed at the required quarterly workshops for academic leadership, including department chairs, provosts, and division chiefs. Visit the APS website for details. 

Guidelines for Academic Affairs Workgroups, Committees, and Task Forces

In striving to accomplish elements of UC San Diego’s strategic plan, campus leaders regularly convene groups of faculty, staff, and student representatives to address issues with far-reaching implications. 

The framework articulated in this document has been jointly developed by administrative and Academic Senate leadership to support the success of critical initiatives. These guidelines apply to joint Senate-Administration workgroups as well as administrative workgroups, committees, task forces, or other teams charged by the Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor (EVC) or its reporting units, including Academic Personnel Services, Student Affairs, and Office for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion. The expectations and protocols outlined below are intended to guide the creation of high-quality reports and recommendations produced by each group in response to its charge.  


Group members are carefully selected based on criteria such as area of expertise, center/scope of responsibility, and ability to represent key stakeholders. It is essential that organizational teams be representative of diverse opinions, experiences, skills, etc. and thus each member is invited to the group for the explicit purpose of sharing their unique perspective. It is important that all workgroup members attend and participate fully. 

Each member is expected to actively contribute to the group’s work both during meetings and outside of meetings by:     

  • Attending meetings and engaging in group discussions, preparing for meetings 
  • Examining, commenting on, and contributing to materials prepared for the group’s review or reference (e.g., meeting agendas, presentations, background information, files for discussion, draft reports)  
  • Assisting the group’s research process and conducting additional due diligence independently as appropriate  

Before agreeing to join a workgroup, prospective members should consider their existing commitments and capacity to contribute to the group’s work within the designated time frame. If a group member is unable to fulfill their commitment to the group, the convener may ask the office(s) that charged the workgroup to provide a replacement. Note that, per existing practice, the group’s designated administrative support staff is responsible for sharing information about faculty service on workgroups to the Academic Senate Committee on Committees.


A group’s charge should include information about the context of the work to be undertaken, specific deliverables requested, associated deadlines, and guidance regarding the due diligence expected to inform the work. 

Groups may choose to develop a team charter to establish the foundation for how the group will work together as a cohesive unit, including additional details regarding conditions of participation, individual roles, and how core business activities will be conducted. 

Groups are encouraged to utilize technology to facilitate efficient project management and to offer several means for members to engage with the group. Information about cloud-based collaboration and communication tools available to faculty and staff is available on Blink (see: 

Since workgroup outcomes have important implications for campus policy and operations, the team should strive to stay within the designated timeline.



Workgroups are expected to conduct robust research to inform evidence-based decision-making. In addition to insights that may be gleaned from individual members’ prior knowledge or experience, teams are expected to incorporate data from relevant internal and external sources. To make the team’s work as effective and relevant as possible, the team should apprise itself of background information, peer best practices, institutional data, and other relevant information.

 At a minimum, groups are encouraged to: 

  • Conduct literature reviews to understand essential principles or theories, academic and/or  industry standards and emerging trends, as well as standard best practices at institutions both within and beyond the U.C.Explore recommendations from related workgroups;  
  • Consult colleagues in other offices to understand organizational dynamics and institutional history; and   
  • Review findings from campus surveys and other relevant campus reports. 

Group chairs and support staff are responsible for facilitating the group’s analysis, but all members are expected to proactively contribute to the group’s data collection and information sharing. 

Institutional Research is available to provide additional support related to data-based planning, evaluation, and assessment. Please visit the office’s website ( to access data and reports from existing analyses or for more information about their services.  


Unless stated otherwise, workgroups dissolve at the conclusion of their project with the submission of their final report and recommendations. 

Reports should be submitted to the office(s) that charged the group. For joint Senate-Administration workgroups, reports should be shared with the EVC Office and Academic Senate concurrently. 

Group chairs may share the near-final draft of their work products with the office(s) that charged the group. This creates an opportunity for campus leaders to ensure that the group’s charge has been addressed comprehensively and completely, and to provide any other overarching suggestions before the workgroup concludes.

The purpose of workgroups is to help develop solutions to systemic challenges facing the campus community and to advance progress towards common strategic goals. With few exceptions, workgroup reports should include specific recommendations for addressing the issues outlined in the charge letter and identified in the group’s analysis. 

The office(s) that charged the group is responsible for responding to the report in consultation with other campus units that may be impacted by or involved with implementing any of the recommendations provided in the report.  When workgroup recommendations propose the creation of new policies or procedures, the group convener should contact the Office of the Executive Vice Chancellor for guidance on proper routing. 


  1. Executive Summary
  2. Table of Contents 
  3. Introduction 
  4. Data & Analysis 
  5. Recommendations 
  6. Conclusion
  7. Appendices
    • Final Group Membership 
    • List of Documents Reviewed 
    • Data sources consulted
    • Analysis methodology