FACULTY SENATE MINUTES

for January 2l, l997 (vol.xxvi,no.l7)

Called to order by Gail Richard at 2:02 p.m.

I. Roll Call--Present: J. Best, G. Foster, F. Fraker, B. Kirk. P. Lenihan, G. Lockart, H. Nordin, G. Richard, J. Schmidt, J. Simpson, J. Tidwell, L. Walker, D. Wolf, A. Zahlan.

Absent: N. Furumo. No record of visitors.

II. Approval of the Minutes

A motion (Walker/Foster) to approve the minutes of January l4, l997, with the following additions/corrections: Vote on motion (Wolf/Kirk) to invite Jason Anselment to the l/2l/97 Faculty Senate meeting to discuss the student fee referendum. Yes-Best, Foster, Kirk, Lenihan, Lockart, Nordin, Schmidt, Simpson, Tidwell, Wolf, Zahlan Abstain - Fraker, Richard, Walker; III. Communication, L - strike the word scheme. Change asynchorous to asynchronous.

Vote on l/14/97 minutes: Yes - Best, Foster, Kirk, Lenihan, Lockart, Richard, Schmidt, Simpson, Tidwell, Walker, Zahlan. Abstain - Fraker, Nordin, Wolf

III. Communications - None

IV. Old Business

A. Report on Student Referendum Process - Jason Anselment

The following materials were distributed: "Campus Improvement Task Force Timeline", "It's Your University", the results of all referendums from Fall l989 through a special election in Spring l995, and a "Presentation Schedule as of l0/30/96".

Jason Anselment reported that this was not a student government driven or endorsed referendum. This was a student driven process with the university administration involved to the extent of providing data and cost estimates when it was requested.

The task force did not present a specific proposal but rather provided options and encouraged students to vote. They did not tell students how to vote.

Questions/Discussion

a. G. Foster - Were any projects undergirded by a feasibility study? J. Anselment - The task force did not do a study but utilized information available to them from various entities on campus.

b. G. Lockart - How did you prioritize?

c. J. Tidwell asked if a Health Service fee passed about a year ago was to help offset expansion of the Health Service? It was concluded that the previous fee was used to expand the staff.

d. L. Walker - How does this fee correlate with the strategic plan? J. Anselment - These are things that the students want and are things to keep the students happy. These may not represent what is included in the strategic plan. Jason felt this was a sound democratic way to pay for these services.

e. F. Fraker - Commended the students for doing all that needed to be done with this project. Fraker expressed a concern about the message that might be sent to the state about funding. If students are willing to fund projects such as this, will the state then wait for the students to fund projects typically supported by the state? J. Anselment - The intent is in no way meant to relieve the state of funding campus needs. The students will continue to work to get more state funding.

f. J. Tidwell asked about the residence hall internet access. J. Anselment - This was the most ambiguous project in terms of the whole package. During the campus presentations it was made very clear to the students that this was a pilot program and that all students would not have direct access.

B. Committee Reports - There were no reports from the following committees: Nominations, Elections, Faculty-Staff Relation and Faculty-Student Relations.

The Taskforce on University College will meet on January 24, l997.

The Library Advisory Board will meet on January 23, l997.

The CUPB will meet on January 24, l997. Lankford Walker will attend since Gail Richard is not available because of previous commitments.

C. Computer Technology - J. Tidwell asked:" Where are we going in terms of computer technology? Who is driving the truck?"

Motion (Tidwell/Walker) to have a Faculty Forum on Policy and Planning in Technology.

Yes - Best, Foster, Fraker, Kirk, Lenihan, Lockart, Nordin, Schmidt, Simpson, Tidwell, Walker, Wolf, Zahlan. Abstain-Richard.

Discussion on the Forum:

a. L. Walker - Faculty are often besieged with information from academic computing and the information is difficult to understand and interpret.

b. J. Tidwell - The forum needs to address issues such as who is in charge in makingdecisions about faculty needs. Some decisions that are made seem to be a breach of academic freedom.

c. J. Best - Is there a sense of disenfranchisement? Why are research and teaching grant proposals reviewed by technology professionals? Need a discussion on problem finding and solving.

d. A. Zahlan - The forum should focus on planning and not what computing can do.

e. Question as to what the $80.00 per computer maintenance fee covers.

A subcommittee was appointed to develope a proposal for the forum. The forum will be: University Technology-Policy and Planning. Members of the subcommittee are: James Tidwell, Chair, and Patrick Lenihan and Lankford Walker.

V. New Business

A. Agenda Items for January 28, l997.

l. Faculty Participation in Commencement - Mark Haines/Others

2. Faculty Forum Report

3. CUPB Report

4. Library Advisory Board Report

5. BOT Report

VI. Motion to adjourn (Walker) at 3:05 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Joan K. Schmidt, Recorder