FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
FOR NOVEMBER 3, 1998
(Vol. xxviii, No. 9)
The Faculty Senate agenda is posted weekly on the Web, at 2540 Buzzard, outside the Conference Room in the Library.
I. Call to order by James Tidwell at 2:00 p.m. (Conference Room, Booth Library)
Present: J. Allison, J. Best, J. Coons, C. Eberly, P. Fewell, G. Foster, N. Furumo, R. Gholson, B. Irwin, G. Lockart, N. Marlow, J. Tidwell, M. Toosi, L. Walker, A. Zahlan. Guests: T. Abebe, K. Franken, T. Sloup.
II. Approval of the minutes of October 27, 1998.
Motion (Walker/Gholson) to approve the minutes of October 27, 1998.
Corrections: V, letter D should read, it was suggested that Faculty Senate look at the syllabus/course guide for SPC 1310.
Yes: Allison, Coons, Eberly, Foster, Furumo, Gholson, Irwin, Lockart, Marlow, Tidwell, Toosi, Walker, Zahlan. Abstentions: Fewell.
A. Minutes of Council on Graduate Studies-October 20, 1998
B. Memorandum from President Jorns to CUPB Members-October 29, 1998
C. Draft of Minutes of Library Advisory Board-October 14, 1998
D. Memo from Provost Abebe concerning Employment and Recruitment Procedures for Administrative Positions-October 27, 1998
E. E-mail from Student Senator Melissa Girten concerning Student Senate Resolutions-November 2, 1998. This will be turned over to the Student/Faculty Relations Subcommittee.
IV. New Business
A. Speech Communication Syllabus-Course Guide. Chair Tidwell spoke with Terry Perkins. This started 10-12 years ago when the department had very little photocopying money. They wanted consistency across sections for SPC 1310. The dean and all others down the line approved it. It could not be done through TRS because it was consumable, and, at that time, the University Print Center could not handle such things. It started out costing about $6, but the cost has risen. The only ones using it this year are the Teaching Assistants. Any royalties go to the University. It will no longer be used after this year. During the Faculty Senate discussion, key issues included:
Internal governing policies stated that students cannot be required to purchase supplementary texts. This is not the case for this document. SPC faculty have suggested that students share it.
The above internal governing policy seems very stringent. It may need to be revisited.
Many courses on campus have extra fees, such as lab fees.
There is no problem with having the students purchase the forms (copied by the Print Center), but the syllabus needs to be removed.
TRS needs to examine the policy-especially in regard to texts for special topics courses, for example.
Students do purchase lab workbooks as a supplement. This is more than a syllabus. It is more analogous to a workbook.
Many faculty have materials on the Internet, but students may be required to pay for the paper to print them up.
Publishing this type of material through an independent company is no longer necessary with the capabilities of the Print Center.
V. Old Business
A. Fall Forum Evaluation. Several Unit B faculty have expressed dismay at being described as threats to quality. They are very uncomfortable. It is important to note that the concern is not Unit B faculty, but the proportions of Unit A and Unit B. Discussion included the following:
This makes it important to establish ratios. This is not about the people who fill these positions whom we admire. It is the numbers that are the threats to quality.
Ratios would have to be established by the Union, not Senate. Unit B faculty cannot vote nor run for election.
Many Unit B faculty have been at Eastern longer than those of us who are Unit A. Is it time to consider representation on Faculty Senate of at least one Unit B person?
Not being able to establish some type of ratio does not prevent us from having some advisory voice. If the proportion of Unit A faculty increases, it does not naturally follow that Unit B will lose jobs. As retirement occur and future hires are made, Unit A hires should be emphasized. We do not want to hurt Unit B faculty unjustly.
UPI's resolution states that those currently employed should not lose any jobs as a result of increasing Unit A proportions.
We do not know how many Unit B faculty are in slots that are really tenure-track positions that have been deferred.
In the English Department there has been the same number of Unit A faculty and increasing numbers of Unit B. The appropriate ratios could be achieved by increasing the number of tenure-track positions, not by removing people from their positions.
Part of the problem was the amount of time spent on this one "threat" to quality.
It was a forum, and the discussion does not represent this body. We have made it clear what we as senators feel. We cannot mandate what other people feel.
The evaluation of Unit B faculty is only by the chair. It is a similar process to that of Unit A, but it is not the same process.
We do not want to become a place where just saying things causes a person or a group to be targeted or chastised. The people who came to the Forum came in good faith and had a right to say what they said.
B. CUPB Issues. There is a meeting on November 13. Chair Tidwell assumes that CUPB will be looking at the bylaws and the Facilities Management Report. A discussion of CUPB issues included the following:
The President's presence as Chair of CUPB was never an issue when writing the bylaws. It has not been an issue until this year.
President Jorns specifically requested that the president continue as chair of CUPB when he first came to campus.
The Senate has already asked Tidwell, as our representative on CUPB, to vote to table the bylaws changes.
CUPB accepted the report from the committee but did not approve it.
Is this policy really a done deal? The President's letter certainly seemed to indicate that.
Motion (Allison/Walker) that the Senate recommends delaying action on the Facilities Management Report recommendations until a new president is in place.
Yes: Allison, Coons, Foster, Furumo, Irwin, Marlow, Toosi, Walker, Zahlan. No: Best, Eberly, Gholson, Lockart. Abstentions: Tidwell.
Discussion of the motion follows:
Is the main concern the outsourcing and jobs for workers?
There are standards established for hiring outside work. Often there is more work on campus than the people on campus can possibly do. There are some projects that would take much more time than those on campus have available.
It is pretty important to take care of repairs immediately because not doing so could halt operations. The decentralization of the budget puts the decisions in the departments.
Should departments be paying for labor provided by University employees? Paying for the materials is understandable. This is one of the real philosophical issues with this. Before decentralization these things were taken care of without using departmental resources for the labor. Departments did not receive additional resources to help meet these additional expenses.
Provost Abebe told the Senate that it is very important to understand where the money is coming from-but the Senate should not cross over into Union issues. Outsourcing is a contractual issue, but where the money comes from is an issue that Faculty Senate can deal with.
Does this represent a transfer of expenditures from business affairs to academic affairs? The idea of charging back is what did not exist before. Somehow Facilities Management has found a way to charge other areas for their resources. Weidner has said that he is operating a business within a business. The University is not a business. That perception must be corrected.
The motion does not really address issues we are talking about now, but asks for a delay until a new president comes. This is a complex issue that needs to be studied by the new president and the Provost. It will take time. One way or another a new way of doing business has occurred that drains funds away from academics. Since we cannot resolve the matter, we can pass this motion to encourage the delay. This would make clear our desire for a new president to analyze and reconsider budgeting arrangements.
A lot of this started before Weidner came.
The main focus is costs. No department owns a building. When we put signs up for a building, why should a department have to pay? There are very serious questions about this business within a business. We are not here to make money.
It would be better to delay this so we can understand the implications of the policy-not just until a new president comes. If it is a bad policy, it will still be bad with a new president. If it is good, it will likewise be good.
Is it presumptuous of us to tell CUPB how to act?
If we have questions, we should ask Weidner to visit Faculty Senate.
A similar policy is already in effect. This documents what we have been working under for quite awhile. This is not a major change in policy. The bigger issue is whether this is good for the University.
We should also approach our College representatives and make them aware of our concerns. This will give us more of a voice.
Walker called the question.
C. Committee Reports.
1. Executive Committee-no report.
2. Nominations-no report.
3. Elections Committee will meet after Senate.
4. Student/Faculty Committee will meet after Senate to consider the Student Senate resolutions.
5. Faculty-Staff Relations. They are trying to set a meeting with the members of this subcommittee from both faculty and staff senates. The Staff Senate representatives are John Flynn, Doug Sloat, and Terry Tomer.
6. Presidential Search Committee. Off-campus interviews will be held this week in Chicago.
7. Search Committee for Director of Major Gifts and Planned Giving. The original pool has been narrowed down to three candidates. They are in the process of contacting their references. The results of those contacts will be reviewed tomorrow.
D. Senator Lockart distributed a handout illustrating how Teacher Education deals with controlling admissions within the college. It was asked whether students are fully apprised of some of the kinds of things that might permanently keep them out of teacher education. A criminal background check cannot keep them from being admitted but it can prevent them from student teaching.
E. Visitor K. Franken asked to speak to the Senate. CAA will be considering the biological sciences curriculum this Thursday. He reminded Faculty Senate of the resolution passed last year. It is hoped that CAA can find a way to remedy some of the problems. Chair Tidwell will communicate with the Chair of CAA. The Faculty Senate stands by its prior resolution.
VI. Adjourn at 3:40 p.m. (Walker)
Future Agenda Items:
Honors Program-Direct Herbert Lasky will visit the Senate November 10.
User Services Update-Bill Witsman and John Henderson
Nancy D. Marlow, Recorder