FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
FOR NOVEMBER 11, 1997
(Vol, xxvii, No. 11)
I. CALL TO ORDER BY GAIL RICHARD AT 2:02 p.m.
Present: J. Allison, C. Eberly, G. Foster, N. Furumo, R. Gholson, B. Irwin, G. Lockart, H. Nordin, G. Richard, J. Schmidt, J. Simpson, J. Tidwell, L. Walker, A. Zahlan; Excused: N. Marlow; Visitors: G. Aylesworth, S. Becker, J. Best, T. Bollinger, J. Coons, C. Costa, N. Coutant, R. Darding, L. Crofutt, D. Ebdon, J. Ebinger, N. Elmuti, R. Fischer, G. Fritz, M. Guetersloh, E. Harris, J. James, J. Kmitch, B. Knotts, K. Kruse, C. Laursen, J. Laursen, J. McGaughey, K. McGillird, E. Moll, B. Nathan, C. Oliver, H. Owen, C. Pederson, D. Ringuette, J. Simpson, L. Shobe, L. Wall, J. Walters, T. Weidner, W. Whiteside,B. Whittenberg, G. Wong, C. Woodworth.
II. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 4, 1997.
A motion (Furumo/Nordin) to approve the minutes of November 4, 1997.
Correction: V.D.1 - The letter received by G. Richard from members of the
Botany Dept. was signed by tenure track, faculty retiring this year,
and those in parttime positions.
Yes - Allison, Foster, Furumo, Gholson, Irwin, Lockart, Nordin, Richard, Schmidt, Simpson, Tidwell, Zahlan; Abstain - Walker.
A. Minutes - Intercollegiate Athletic Board - 10/2/97
B. Minutes - Continuing Education Coordinating Council - 10/13/97
C. Minutes - International Programs Advisory Committee; Agenda-11/18/97
D. Minutes - Library Advisory Board - 10/29/97
E. Flyer - "State Funding of Higher Education" presentation sponsored by the UPI on November 18, 1997, 3:30 - 5:00 p.m., Phipps Lecture Hall
F. E-Mail from Jeanne Simpson regarding the reorganization of Botany & Zoology and clarifying that Article 15 of the EIU/UPI Agreement addresses reorganization/consolidation. The provisions of Article 15 have been met in this situation.
G. E-mail from C. Mendez to J. Allison supporting a referendum
H. E-mail from K. Bridges supporting a referendum
I. Memo from 3 members of the Botany faculty regarding the Faculty Senate involvement in the reorganization of Botany/Zoology
J. Memo from C. Smith to John Allison supporting a referendum on Constitutional Planning
K. Memo from D. Carpenter to John Allison supporting a referendum on Constitutional Planning
L. Memo from T. Shonk to J. Allison supporting a referendum on Constitutional Planning
IV. OLD BUSINESS
A. Botany/Zoology Consolidation Concerns--J. Coons was the spokesperson of the Botany Dept. and responded to the Faculty Senate minutes, 10/28/97, V.D. and addressed the concerns expressed by a majority of the Botany faculty. A summary of her comments follows:
1. The reorganization plan was announced on 8/29/97.
2. When reorganization occurs, it is normal for concerns to be expressed and expression of these concerns can be healthy if the ideas help to build a stronger unit.
3. The main areas of concern were the process used to make the decision and the importance of keeping the Botany program intact.
4. The decision to consolidate the Botany/Zoology Depts. at this time came as a surprise to the Botany faculty since the the COS Strategic Plan, 95-96, recommended a review of the administrative structure and the degree offerings. An external review was done in Fall 1996 and the review team was asked to address consolidation. The recommendation of the external review team was not to merge the Botany and Zoology Depts at this time.(Dec. 1996).
5. The COS Strategic Plan 96-97 suggested that the recommendations of the external consultants be implemented regarding administrative structures, programs and degree offerings. FY98
6. Spring 1997 recommendations of the external review team were implemented which resulted in a savings of $34,389 for Botany and Zoology and also $30,000 in regained Cus.
7. Botany faculty received a memo dated June 30, 1997, informing them of the plans for the search for a Botany Dept. Chair so when the consolidation was announced at the 8/29/97 Botany meeting it came as a surprise to the faculty.
8. There does not appear to be any significant savings beyond those already recovered in Spring 1997 with the administrative changes.
9. The draft of the reorganization plan was given to faculty in September with a copy on file in Booth Library. The plan does not give a clear indication that the Botany program and degree will remain intact.
10. L. Wall reported a 78% increase in operating funds although it is not clear if that includes those monies already saved through the implementation of the recommendations from the external review. Those changes resulted in a 66% increase for Botany.
11. The maintenance of the Botany program is important. The program is highly respected nationally and internationally and is the only program in Illinois with an emphasis on field botany. Eastern's graduates in this program have been successful and are very supportive of the program. Botany has received many commendations from state and national organizations.
12. A final draft of the reorganization has not been received. Botany faculty received verbal support from T. Weidner and D. Jorns that the Botany program/degree would remain intact but there has been nothing in writing.
L. Wall provided an overview of the reorganization from the college perspective.
1. L. Wall identified lack of resources, lack of coordination of efforts between programs and departments and an inefficient flow of communication between the units as reasons for the reorganization.
2. She identified excellent faculty as a strength in both departments.
3. In 1993 and 1996 three of the programs which involved the two departments merged into Biology.(MS in Biological Sciences, MSED in Biological Sciences, BS/TC in Biological Sciences).
4. The Environmental Biology program has grown from 64-200 majors and students in that program do not have a departmental home.
5. There has been faculty and department chair input over time in the process with the goal of improving communication lines and reducing administrative costs. Outside consultants reviewed the programs and recommendations from the consultants were implemented, including a modification of reporting lines.
6. The shift from the department concept to the School of Biological Science was made to imply the complexity of the program.
7. L. Wall met with the faculties of Zoology and Botany in August 1997. A School Plan was developed with a copy posted in the library for 30 days as required by Article 15 of the EIU/UPI agreement.
8. L. Wall is now trying to incorporate faculty comments into the document. A retreat will be held to discuss the recommendations and make decisions.
9. Benefits of the consolidation are:
a. field/organismal programs will be maintained,
b. cellular/molecular techniques will be added to existing programs,
c. students will receive broad information about biological sciences,
d. there will be opportunity/resources for faculty development and
e. there will be resources to improve basic equipment and to obtain technologically advanced equipment.
10. Outcome of the consolidation is: broadened career paths for students, 78% increase in the operating budget, updated equipment and resources for faculty development.
General discussion followed with the following comments and questions:
1. Has the reorganization been approved and finalized by the President's Council? T. Weidner indicated that no final plan has been received yet. The plan has to be approved by the IBHE.
2. Why would a search committee for the Chair of Biological Sciences be formed before the reorganization is approved? T. Weidner indicated that a search can be stopped if necessary.
3. There seems to be a difference of opinion about when reorganization should occur or be considered as outlined by the external consultants. The external consultants suggested that this should be reevaluated after a period of about 5 years. (Recommendation made in 1996). L. Wall indicated that because of the state's new retirement plan there was a window of opportunity to make changes now rather than wait.
4. There was a difference of opinion about the coordination of efforts between programs and departments since there is sharing of classes, sharing of a computer lab, sharing of the stock room, sharing of the dark room and research proposals with faculty from both Zoology and Botany. Two new courses have also been developed in tissue culture.
5. The Zoology Dept. did not initiate the merger but saw the possibility of some dollars becoming available.
6. The merger of the two departments does not mean the end of Botany at EIU.
7. The amount of savings was unclear particularly with the hiring of a chair in Biological Sciences.
MOTION (Allison/Walker) to request that President Jorns and Vice President Weidner take steps to assure the survival of the Botany Department as a separate unit within the College of Science.
It was suggested that members of the Faculty Senate read the letter submitted by three members of the Botany Department before voting on this motion.
G. Richard will provide copies of the letter to the members of the Faculty Senate. There was further discussion of the reorganization.
MOTION (Allison/Walker) to postpone the vote on the motion until next week and to have this as the first agenda item under Old Business at the 11/18/97 Faculty Senate Meeting. Yes - Allison, Furumo, Walker. No - Eberly, Foster, Gholson, Lockart, Nordin, Schmidt, Simpson, Tidwell. Abstain - Richard, Zahlan. (3-8-2)
MOTION (Foster/Nordin) to table the motion.
Yes - Eberly, Foster, Furumo, Gholson, Lockart, Nordin, Schmidt, Simpson, Tidwell; No - Allison, Walker. Abstain - Richard, Zahlan (9-2-2)
B. Referendum on referendum
1. John Allison withdrew the motion reported in the 11/4/97 Faculty Senate minutes, V.C. after discussion of the most appropriate way to get the concerns of faculty and department chairs on planning addressed by the administration. G. Aylesworth reported that the Council of Chairs will once again submit to the administration a request to evaluate the process presently being used for planning.
2. G. Aylesworth reported that the process that was supposed to address inefficiency and waste is, in fact, wasteful and inefficient. The amount of time and energy expended by faculty and department chairs to complete the process is tremendous and what do you get in the end? There are better ways of planning. The planning cycle and the budget cycle are not together so you don't know what the resources will be. There needs to be a better way of going through the elaborate process of planning so that in the end you receive a "yes" or a "no".
3. D. Ringuette indicated that he supported self analysis and comparative analysis and that he felt continued input from all citizens was important. There has been little opportunity for constructive feedback during the process and when it has been presented the administration has not been receptive.
4. H. Nordin indicated that the problem with the process is that it has been imposed and there has been no give or take. The administration has not been willing to listen to changes.
5. B. Whittenberg indicated that he has a problem with the validity of the process itself. Timing is not the problem but rather the process.
The general consensus of the Faculty Senate was to support the work and concerns of the faculty chairs with Constitutional Planning. The chairs are the individuals who have worked most closely with the planning process. If the concerns of the faculty chairs are not addressed by the administration then the Faculty Senate will discuss alternate ways to address the issues.
C. The Faculty Senate agenda was not completed because of a lack of time.
There were no committee reports discussed under Old Business.
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. Agenda for 11/18/97
1. Jim Hanna - update on fundraising programs
2. Presentation on State Funding of Higher Education by Ron Ettinger at 3:30 p.m. in Phipps Lecture Hall - Senate will adjourn to attend that presentation sponsored by the UPI.
VI. ADJOURN AT 4:17 p.m. (Walker)
Joan K. Schmidt, Recorder