10-19-99 minutes

FACULTY SENATE MINUTES
FOR OCTOBER 19, 1999
(Vol. xxix, No. 9)

The Faculty Senate agenda is posted weekly on the Web, at 2504 Buzzard, and at 315K Coleman.

The following is the question for candidates for the special election for Senate: Comment on the discussions and actions of this year’s Faculty Senate. Mention where you agree and where you disagree. What are the issues that you feel the Senate should discuss next year?

Return responses to John Best (Psychology) by November 1.

I. Call to order by Vice Chair John Best 2:02 p.m. (2504 Buzzard Building)

Present: J. Allison, R. Benedict, J. Best, J. Coons, C. Eberly, P. Fewell, G. Foster, G. Lockart, N. Marlow, J. Tidwell, M. Toosi, B. Young, K. Bielenberg, G. Kelly, B. Mazurski. Excused: B. Fischer, B. Irwin. Guests: J. Aarnio (Visiting professor from Finland, T. Abebe, K. Franken, J. Maholy

II. Approval of the minutes of October 12, 1999

Motion (Foster/Allison) to approve the minutes of October 12, 1999.

Corrections: Under guests "Laiette" should be "Layette." Under the President’s remarks, the statement regarding faculty salaries (fifth line from bottom, first page) does not accurately reflect what she said. A question regarding equipment purchases was omitted; it was asked how these could be made earlier in the academic year. On the second page, fifth bullet, add: The President recognizes that the Faculty Senate naturally can provide advise about any matters reflecting the welfare of the University. On the second page, fifth bullet from the bottom, the last phrase should read, "graduate students benefit from liberal arts, too." At the end of the bulleted items the following should be added as an additional bullet: A senator recognized a student member of the audience who asked the president about FOIA appeals he had made. After the President answered his question, the Senate chair deemed further questions in this direction inappropriate to the matters under discussion.

Yes: Allison, Benedict, Best, Coons, Eberly, Fewell, Foster, Lockart, Tidwell, Toosi, Young.

III. Communications

CAA minutes from October 7, 1999. The Mathematics and Physical and Life Sciences segments of general education were discussed.
Phone message from William Brooks, Student Senate, regarding community task force. Some representatives of student senate will be getting together with community members on a task force to discuss the bar hours initiative and other issues. They’d like a faculty member to join them (Thursday, 7:30 PM, Charleston-Mattoon Room).
Minutes of BOT meeting, July 12, 1999.
EIU Report to Board of Trustees, October 18, 1999.
E-mail from Jackie Clapp. She can serve as a contact person for those who wish to contribute to the Foundation in Lankford Walker’s memory. Additionally, people can make donations to the Coles County Animal Shelter.
The Senate complimented John Allison and David Carpenter for the very nice memorial service they planned for Dr. Walker.

Old Business

Committee Reports

The Executive Committee met on October 14 with the President and the Provost. There was agreement that the President’s visit with the Senate had gone well. The President commented that faculty development has come up in virtually every departmental meeting she has attended. We need to communicate to outside constituencies the importance of faculty development. She also discussed the issue of upward mobility (movement into administration) for faculty. There is a need to develop a pool of talent; there is a danger in corporatizing the University. She agreed that the Library was a good place for the plaque. Since that meeting, a temporary site has been found in the Provost’s complex. Later it could be moved to the Library or perhaps the new arts center, somewhere with high visibility. She expressed a lot of sensitivity of charging into others’ space; the Union is the students’ space and may not be appropriate. The President clarified her notion of liberal arts–not as a discipline but in its broadest sense. One of the main issues was budgetary policy and financial analysis. There is recognition that for many faculty the entire budgetary apparatus and the political process may be unknown. She gave the committee a very good lesson about the legal matters of what can and cannot be done. There was a feeling that there needs to be better communication about budgetary planning. Faculty cannot play the role the need to play until they get more knowledge about the general process. The committee also discussed the need for faculty to play future roles that go beyond scholarship. The report was followed by questions and discussion:

Will this education (regarding the budgetary process) come with less participation in the process? Without putting words in the President’s mouth, this is an expansion of a partnership. Faculty need to tell her about problems and pool resources to solve those problems. There was no explicit discussion of CUPB.
Did the need for faculty to be more flexible include any discussion of teaching outside the discipline into which a faculty member was originally employed? Nothing was that explicit.
The Provost was asked about the $1 million donation. He said that some of that money is earmarked by the BOT for faculty development purposes. The President is very committed to this and the issue of inward upward-mobility. If we do not prepare the future leaders of this institution, then we do not serve this institution well. The rest of the money will be used to create a teachers’ center in line with the ideas of the benefactor. It was very courageous of the President to go to the Board and make the case that this money be used for faculty development. At most institutions this type of donation goes into the foundation where it is used to build wealth.
Does faculty development include scholarly development? They are in the process of trying to identify this. The sense is that faculty will be asked to identify their own objectives for development.
The Senate proposed that the Ad Hoc Drafting Committee propose an appropriate motion in response to the $1 million donation.
The VPAA had requested funds for a faculty development center, but we do not have the money. He will continue to talk to faculty across the campus. If there is not a center, there will still be an attempt to integrate these activities. The focus is not on what faculty have done in the past but what they would like to do in the future. We need development activities to retain faculty.
Will the entire $1 million be used or the interest from the donation. This is still in the elementary stages. However, they would like each faculty member to share in this and would like each faculty member to define his/her own development initiative over a period of 3-4 years. The dollars are one-time dollars.
The Provost was asked if he thought the forum Senate is planning should take this and include it in the discussion. The usefulness of a forum would be to identify the types of things suitable for faculty so that individual faculty members could get ideas.

Elections. Petitions are due Friday, October 22. Vice Chair Best recommended that each Senator encourage a person to run for Senate. The question for Senate candidates is printed at the beginning of today’s minutes. Candidates have until November 1 to respond to the question. The election will be held the following week–November 10 and 11. There was some discussion of alternates for Senate.
Faculty Student Relations. The Committee presented a draft of a letter they had prepared about the Student Conduct Code. The Committee recommends the following: (1) Incorporate the importance of community throughout; (2) Consider greater penalties, i.e. greater fines, notification of parents, placement of actions in permanent record in certain situations; (3) Address technology concerns; (4) Determine whether the phrase "not regarded as contractual covenants" releases students from responsibility; (5) Clarify the hierarchy of judicial boards and their membership composition. The Committee also recommends that additional open discussions be held for members of the campus community since the first rounds were not well attended.

Motion (Coons/Allison) that the letter be sent to Keith Kohanzo.

Discussion of the motion included:

There were questions about the fourth recommendation.
The student members commented that these recommendations were pretty close to what they had been expecting. They did ask about the second recommendation: is this common on other campuses? Would it hurt students in their careers? Some universities do this; some do not. Some potential employers do ask to see permanent records. There needs to be a distinction between permanent record and transcript. It would require the student’s permission for a potential employer to access a permanent record.
There were some questions about the process–whether the whole student body will vote on the Conduct Code. They do plan to hold several forums; some have already been held.

Yes: Allison, Benedict, Best, Coons, Eberly, Fewell, Foster, Lockart, Marlow, Tidwell, Toosi, Young.

The Faculty Student Relations Committee will meet tonight at 6:30.

Search Committees. The deadline for applications for Graduate Dean is October 15. The Committee will meet on Tuesday, October 26 to decide on a short list for phone work. They hope to bring three highly qualified candidates on campus this semester.
Ad Hoc Drafting Committee. The Committee presented its draft for the Fall Forum. The Committee recommends a flier advertising the forum focusing on the four areas with a handout with a more detailed delineation of the topics. The four topics are (1) faculty development as a means to recruit and retain quality faculty; (2) the benefits of improved faculty development for students; (3) the benefits of improved faculty development for the community; and (4) assessment as a means of demonstrating benefits of faculty development. The plan is for the forum to begin with an introduction by the Senate Chair followed by separate breakout sections for each of the above. Faculty will choose the breakout session in which they wish to participate. Discussion included the following points:

Some people have commented that they are not as comfortable with the concept of breakout groups.
Others have said that we could be more productive in small groups.
We can see if it will work. People can go where they want. If time allows can they can go to other groups as well.
Are we being too optimistic to assume that everyone can make the two-hour time commitment?
This procedure works very will with individuals who cannot commit the full time. These small groups can be more productive in this way. Large groups can get bogged down.
There will be some administrators as well. If they are in these smaller groups, there is always a chance of more administration pressure on the discussions.
It was suggested to arrange the forum so that 30 minutes will be spent on each of the topics. That way participants can participate in all discussions.
There are some concerns with our ability to discuss these issues in 15-30 minutes.
There is value in letting those present decide what is important to them by their presence. The worst that can happen is that it does not work.
We can encourage administrators to talk and to shut up. We do not want them to dominate but we do want them there to listen to what faculty have to say.
A Faculty Senate list serve could tell us in advance whether this structural arrangement is advantageous. The Executive Committee will look into this issue.

The Senate will return to the draft document briefly next week.

IBHE Faculty Advisory Committee. The FAC met on October 5; during the morning the FAC members were a part of the audience for the IBHE meeting. Universities have submitted their results reports. Provost Abebe noted that Eastern came out very well; EIU’s best practice was the integration of learning and leadership. Six Universities were selected to present a part of their reports; each one represented a best practice for one of the IBHE goals. The statewide analysis of the results reports will be presented at the December meeting. During the afternoon session the FAC met with two IBHE members to discuss faculty issues.

Activity for International Students. Senators Bailey and Marlow met to discuss some possibilities. They recommend an event to be held in Tarble in conjunction with the Old Main exhibit. A tentative date and time is Tuesday, November 30, from 3:30-5:00. The subcommittee will meet with international student representatives and Gary Kelly (student senate representative to faculty senate) to finalize this.
Community Task Force. Reed Benedict will attend this meeting (Communications item B). The Student Senate plans to change its Bylaws to form a permanent committee that will meet once a month.

Adjourn at 3:55 (Allison)

Respectfully submitted,

Nancy D. Marlow, Recorder