Minutes #592

John Jay College of Criminal Justice

Attendance

Present (27):

Jacob Adler, Chevy (Schevaletta) Alford, Elton Beckett, Ned Benton, Bibi (Silvina) Calderaro, Joy Dunkley, Jonathan Epstein, Alejandro Garcia Lozano, Heath Grant, Sergio Grossi, Michelle Holder, Karen Kaplowitz, Allison Kavey, Jamie Longazel, Cristina Lozano Arguelles, Joseph Maldonado, Brian Maule, David Munns, Ray Patton, Kumar Ramansenthil, Macushla Robinson, Amada Santiago, Francis Sheehan, Marie Springer, Todd Stambaugh, Charles Stone, Shilpa Viswanath

Absent (10):

Kathleen Collins, Artem Domashevskiy, Jennifer Dysart, Diana Falkenbach, Sergio Gallegos, Veronica Henrick, Anru Lee, Kyoo Lee, Josh Mason, Meriem Rabbani

Invited Guest:

VP for Institutional Effectiveness Christopher Shults

Agenda

1. Adoption of the agenda
2. Approval of Minutes #591 of the February 5, 2026, meeting
3. Consideration of proposed changes to the Faculty Senate’s proposed policy on recording class sessions without permission: Executive Committee
4. Discussion of Draft 5-Year Strategic Plan & Mission Statement & Vision Statement & Values: Invited Guest: VP for Institutional Effectiveness Christopher Shults
5. Proposed Policies regarding Generative Algorithms [GA]: Faculty Senate Technology Committee
6. ADA accommodation: discussion on flexible absences
7. Proposal to Recommend that departments boycott CUNY’s Mandatory Brightspace Title 6 Training: Department of Political Science
8. Discussion on Course Overtallies
9. New business

1. Adoption of the Agenda

Approved

2. Approval of Minutes #591 of the February 5, 2026, Meeting

Approved

3. Consideration of Proposed Changes to the Faculty Senate’s Proposed Policy on Recording Class Sessions Without Permission: Executive Committee

President Kaplowitz and Senator Ned Benton presented proposed revisions of the Senate’s policy on recording classes, in response to the discussion of the proposal policy at the February meeting of the College Council.

Given that students at the College Council objected to having something they characterized as a right now being taken away from them, the executive committee is proposing that the following text be added prior to the clause that speaks about intellectual property rights:

Whereas, The recording, copying, or reproduction of course materials and class presentations is already prohibited or strictly limited based on copyrights belonging to faculty members and to publishers of textbooks and course materials, and

Senator Ned Benton explained that he proposed this additional Whereas clause because it is important that we state that we have these rights; the CUNY Intellectual Property Policy states this unambiguously. He also suggested amending the language regarding recording the class as a reasonable accommodation. He explained that there may be something better than a recording made by the student and, therefore, we shouldn’t present student recordings as the gold standard. Perhaps the college -- OAS or DoIT – might record the class sessions which would be less disruptive and put the recording process under the control of the professor. Other supplemental materials might be better than a recording for the student. The issue is that we provide students with reasonable accommodations, which is not necessarily a recording made by the student. President Kaplowitz explained that only 30 students have received permission from OAS to record their classes as a reasonable accommodation this year.

Accordingly, the following changes were proposed: the proposal is to add the underlined text and to delete the text that has a line through it:

In cases where access permission to recorded class sessions is a Reasonable Accommodation, as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and as determined through an interactive process with the Office of Accessibility Services, the instructor(s) will be consulted to ensure that the recording takes place provide or permit recording or to provide alternative supplemental study material in a manner that minimizes disruption and that adheres to this policy and to intellectual property protections;

A student or visitor who is granted permission to record or photograph/videotape provided a recording or permitted to record a class session or who is provided alternative supplemental study materials is not permitted to share, copy, download, disseminate, or sell such authorized recordings, and photographs/videotapes, and materials to others;

The Faculty Senate approved all these changes by unanimous vote. [See Appendix, below, for the policy with the changes embedded.]

Senator Todd Stambaugh said he is skeptical that we will change minds by changing words. He noted that educational research reveals that the idea that there are different kinds of learners, visual versus auditory, as students claimed at the College Council, is a myth.

Senator Allison Kavey noted that students do not like to be recorded; we need to explain that we are protecting not only ourselves but them.

President Kaplowitz reported that at last week’s Town Meeting, a student said he had been at the College Council meeting and asked her if the faculty concern about students recording their classes and putting them on the web is because there have been actual incidents that led to the proposal of this policy or whether we are proposing it on principle or in anticipation of problems. She told the student that there have been incidents at John Jay and across the nation. She said we should be sure to have faculty speak at the College Council about their personal experiences.

President Kaplowitz reported that the Senate’s Executive Committee decided to invite the Council of Chairs to co-sponsor or endorse the proposal and she has already asked that it be on the CoC March 3 meeting.

4. Discussion of Draft 5-Year Strategic Plan & Mission Statement & Vision Statement & Values: Invited Guest: VP for Institutional Effectiveness Christopher Shults

VP Shults reported we are 18 months into the process of developing our next 5-year strategic plan. There have been more than 40 focus groups at which basic questions were asked around mission, vision, values and priorities. He conducted an environmental scan and reviewed 18 reports. The framework (draft) was distributed in December and since then there have been 3 months of review work. Then he received comments from faculty, staff, and students. There have been 500 people involved in this work and 19 groups have commented. He has more than 170 pages of transcripts.

He said he was thrilled with the responses to the draft strategic plan. He said one might think people don’t love what they’re seeing but their criticisms are actually a commentary on the wording and so what we need is to make edits. This is the process of honing a finished product. In looking at the comments, he said he sees that we do not need to make big changes in either the goals or strategies but rather in the wording. There is a lot of alignment in the comments. He is excited by where we are.

VP Shults said his goal is to get the edited version and narrative finished in late March but President Mason has just told him that instead of the original goal to bring the plan to the College Council for a vote in April, we can bring it in May, if we need more time.

He said the students love our current values more than those proposed for this new plan. He said that the main faculty comment is that research and scholarship must be front and center in the plan, not just connected to teaching. He explained that research did not come out as strongly in focus groups but comments about research tripled and quadrupled when the draft was released. He said the thing that caught him off guard was the dichotomy regarding the rule of law as one of the values: some wanted us to return to the original mission of the college and others wanted the opposite. He read Jerry Markowitz’s history of John Jay three times. Otherwise, nothing surprised him other than the large number of people who participated in the process; he said more participated than at any of the other three institutions where he has led the development of their strategic plan.

Senator Ray Patton said so much is packed in the draft plan that there’s no distinctiveness; the plan doesn’t show where we’re going in the next 5 years. Past plans focused on research; others on student success; this one doesn’t show what we’re going to be focusing on.

VP Shults said we will know more after his meeting with the Strategic Planning Committee the next day.

The meeting was adjourned at 2:55 PM.

Submitted by Heath Grant and Karen Kaplowitz

Appendix

Proposed Policy of the Faculty Senate Prohibiting Students from Recording Class Sessions Without the Permission of the Course Instructor(s)

Whereas, Open and free discourse in our classrooms, where students feel they can express disparate viewpoints, voice disagreement, and ask questions is a goal that we value, embrace, and wish to protect at John Jay, and

Whereas, Students have a legitimate right to not be intimidated in the classroom and a right to receive an education in which different sides of contested issues can be critically examined without fear of public exposure, and

Whereas, An open and free exchange of ideas requires an atmosphere of trust, and a space free from unwelcome or surreptitious recordings, both visual and audio, and

Whereas, If students fear that their comments or presentations may be disseminated outside the context of the learning environment, they may be less likely to participate or may self-censor, which can negatively impact the learning experience of all the students in a course, and

Whereas, Laws such as the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) protect student education records, including personally identifiable information that can be revealed in recordings and photographs/videotaping, and

Whereas, Recordings, especially because they can be shared online, can violate personal and legal privacy expectations, which is especially important for students and instructors who might have safety concerns, such as personal abusive situations, and

Whereas, The recording, copying, or reproduction of course materials and class presentations is already prohibited or strictly limited based on copyrights belonging to faculty members and to publishers of textbooks and course materials, and

Whereas, Class lectures and course materials often constitute the intellectual property of the instructor, recordings of which could result in the unauthorized use of these materials, leading to copyright infringement and intellectual property theft; and

Whereas, Unauthorized recordings can be selectively edited, taken out of context, or distorted in order to engage in malicious actions, mislead others, or engage in cyberbullying, and

Whereas, Queens College/CUNY and the CUNY School of Law and many other institutions of higher education throughout the country have adopted policies prohibiting the audio and visual recordings of classes without the written permission of the course instructor(s),

Therefore, Be It Resolved,

That, The following be the policy of John Jay College of Criminal Justice:

The recording, photographing, or videotaping of all or parts of classes is prohibited unless written permission is given by the course instructor(s). This includes undisclosed or surreptitious recordings of any kind, including photos, audio, and video recordings by students or class visitors;

In cases where access to recorded class sessions is a Reasonable Accommodation, as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and as determined through an interactive process with the Office of Accessibility Services, the instructor(s) will be consulted to provide or permit recording or to provide alternative supplemental study material in a manner that minimizes disruption and adheres to this policy and to intellectual property protections;

A student or visitor who is provided a recording or permitted to record a class session or who is provided alternative supplemental study materials is not permitted to share, copy, download, disseminate, or sell such authorized recordings, photographs/videotapes, and materials to others;

Notwithstanding any language to the contrary, it is not a violation of this policy for an attendee to make a recording in class of conduct that violates another University policy or regulation if the recording is made for the sole purpose of reporting that conduct to an appropriate College or University Office. The dissemination or use of such a recording beyond what is necessary to address alleged violations of College or University policies and regulations is a violation of this policy;

Students in violation of this policy may be subject to disciplinary action, and visitors in violation of this policy may be subject to removal from the classroom and/or campus; and

Be It Further Resolved That, This policy be widely disseminated to all students, faculty, and staff of the College each semester; and

Be It Further Resolved That, Faculty include this policy on their undergraduate and graduate course syllabi and state in their syllabi whether students may make recordings and, if so, under what conditions.