Minutes for February 7, 2000
The Faculty Senate of Eastern Kentucky University met on Monday, February 7, 2000 in the South Room of the Keen Johnson Building. Senate Chair Phyllis Murray called the fifth meeting of the academic year to order at 3:30 p.m.
The following members of the Senate were absent:
|M. Baxter*||M. Hodge||D. Jackson|
|C. Melton-Freeman||K. Rahimzadeh*||R. Rink*|
|J. Stephens*||S. Sorting*||J. Taylor*|
|R. Thompson||M. Wasicsko*||C. Yank*|
*denotes prior notification of absence to the Faculty Senate Secretary
Visitors to the Senate were: Paula Kopacz, English; Jacinta Feldman, Progress; Corey Wilson, Progress; Vern Snyder, Development/Advancement; Derita Ratcliffe, Athletics; Sandy Hunter, LPS; David Gale, Health Sciences; and Gail Maynard, Family and Consumer Sciences
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES:
Senator Murray called for additions, deletions or corrections to the minutes of December 6, 1999. There being none, the minutes were approved as distributed. Senator called for additions, deletions or corrections to the minutes of December 13, 1999. There being none, the minutes were approved as distributed.
Senator Murray recognized a very valuable member of the Senate, Mr. Charles Hay, who has resigned as secretary. She acknowledged his long term service to the Senate--unfailing in terms of dedication and commitment, always making sure the Senate ran efficiently. Several former chairs of the Senate offered appreciations to Mr. Hay. Paula Kopacz: "A new secretary takes over with the calendar year, while the new Senate chair begins at the beginning of the academic year. I discovered there was good reason for that--presumably, somebody knows what they are doing. When I became Senate chair in 1991, the old secretary resigned. That meant that beginning in August of 1991, there was a new Senate chair and a new Senate secretary at the beginning of my stint. Well, Charles was the new secretary. We were beginners together, and I have always appreciated Charles for his quiet, calming influence and his ability to structure the year, to organize all the various threads involved in running the Senate and, certainly, to get things done. Charles was a constant, effective, efficient presence behind the scenes for the entire year, and I want to thank you for your quiet modesty. You were a wonderful support.
Senator Karen Janssen: "Virginia Wright wanted to be here. She sends her regards and appreciation. When I gave her a call she had absolutely wonderful things to say about you, Charles. Ward Wright chimed in with the comparison of his experiences and her experiences and thought that she came out the winner, because you were the secretary while she was the chair of the Senate. Allen Engle wanted to be here, but wasn't able to be and so, I am going to read a statement from him. "Please present the following to Charles and the gang along with my apologizes for not being able to attend. As an academic community, we all too often focus on the differences between individuals and groups. Differences in discipline, status, rank and position. Charles is one of the many people who make EKU the very special place that it is. He does not draw attention to himself and, yet, his contributions to our community are critical. His quiet diligence, attention to detail and true personal concern for the many people he works with are all characteristics we have come to expect and to lean on. The successes of the Senate are in no small part due to his professionalism and kindness. As Senate chair, I was constantly amazed by Charles' combination of knowledge, about the intricacies of bureaucracy, the history of the University and the facts found in past Senate minutes, and wisdom. His human concern for students, faculty and many guests of the Senate. I thank Charles for his willingness to do for me, what this institution as always prided itself in doing. For teaching me, in lessons great and small, what it is to be a member of the Eastern community. Thank you again. We will miss your quiet, strong presence among us." Now, for myself, and there isn't much left to be said but that Charles Hay provided continuity, as has been said, for the Senate as Senate chairs come and go. We all know that Charles consistently produced concise and accurate minutes. As chair, I quickly learned to value all his behind the scenes work. He scheduled space and checked on arrangements and gently reminded me of the things that I needed to do. Most importantly, he was very supportive. I shall always treasure Charles as one of my best professional friends. Thank you."
Senator Murray acknowledged that she, too, would also like to echo the sentiments of Senator Janssen. "I know that I have worked with Charles for a shorter period of time than other chairs. But I came quickly to appreciate his quiet support, his gentle prodding and reminders to get things done and stay on task. This was invaluable to me. He told me in a kind way and a very positive way the things that needed to be done. In addition, we should thank Charles for getting the Senate up to par in the use of technology. So thank you very much. The Faculty Senate would now like to express its gratitude to Charles Hay by giving him this beautiful print and--a gold watch."
Senator Murray announced that Dr. Miller, who is currently serving as parliamentarian, has also agreed to finish out the year as secretary. She thanked him for accepting this dual role.
REPORT FROM THE PRESIDENT: Senator Kustra
Senator Kustra took the opportunity to thank Charles Hay for his preciseness and literacy in the way that he records the minutes of the Senate. "Thank you for your service to the University, it really means a lot to us all."
Senator Kustra reported the Governor's recommended budget of the legislature. "The legislature will be working fast and furiously on the budget over the next few weeks. I don't have anything final to report because, of course, the legislature can always change what the governor recommended. Instead of focusing on actual numbers, I will talk about what we managed to get out of the governor's recommendation. Again, we still have a way to go in the process. I would like to back up and give a little bit of a history lesson, if you will, or at least an analysis of the changes that have been taking place in the last few years, because there does seem to me to be one fundamental difference in approach that the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the Council on Postsecondary Education is taking your budgeting in higher education today as opposed to everything after the Spring of 1998. That was the time when the Higher Education Reforms were passed by the Kentucky General Assembly. At that time, the governor and the legislature agreed that the state should offer incentives to universities to do the things that were the priorities of the Commonwealth and the Council on Postsecondary Education, and the only way to get those done would be to create incentive funds that would allow dollars available for certain missions that were so important that they could no longer be left to the discretion of the universities.
In the governor's budget recommendations, you will notice that they are really two columns of so-called operating expenditures. One column is what you have traditionally called the increase in the base budget. This year, we are being given a 2.4 percent increase in the base budget. On the other side, the Council on Postsecondary Education has indeed created a number of incentive funds and those incentive funds are clearly for our institutional involvement. In fact, we know the millions of dollar that we can access from those incentive funds. One of those incentive funds for example, is recruitment and retention. There is no better example of the council's priorities being congruent with our priorities in the area of recruitment and retention. We have clearly identified that recruitment and retention is one of this University's most important missions, and we have countless campus partners working on that.
Another of their priorities is that we improve teacher quality, and we do so by encouraging colleges of education to become models, not only for the commonwealth, but for the states beyond our borders, and one of the other incentive funds deals with that. There is another one that deals with faculty development--again, one of the longest and I think, oldest complaints of this faculty that there are really never enough dollars for faculty professional development. The council says here is a million dollars; we are going to let universities demonstrate their competency to use those funds. I would like to add that, as an editorial note, we are certainly in pretty good shape there, because I believe Western Kentucky is the only other university in the state that has formalized its dedication and commitment to professional development as we have with the creation of our new Center for Teaching and Learning. So, there is no question we are going to get some of those dollars. All of these incentive dollars are available in the second year of the biennium, not the first. That has to do with the fact that the state is not doing so well right now, and they are really robbing Peter to pay Paul. They are going to use the money in the first biennium to meet some of our immediate needs, and they don't want to open up these incentive funds until the second year of the biennium.
Also, regarding recruitment and retention, the monies that are going to become available to Eastern and other schools, to date, have been designated by the council as monies we would get once we improve our recruitment, once we improve our numbers. I suggested to Gordon Davies that that didn't make a lot of sense to me. That if they are acknowledging that we have a problem in increasing our enrollment and they are asking us to devote new funding to strategies that will get us there, if we don't have the money, then how can we do it. It sounds like a set up for failure to me. I hope the legislature will be able to change that particular clause in the budget bill and give universities the money up front. Let us see if we have any success in recruiting and adding to our numbers, and if we don't, they can take it away down the road. I don't know whether we will win that one or not, but the Council apparently has some members on it that feel very strongly that we have to prove ourselves first. The fact of the matter is we are proving ourselves right now. I can't tell you how impressed I was (one of my finest days on this campus) early last month when sixty people--faculty, staff, students--gathered in the Perkins Building for an all-day brainstorming session on what we could do to improve recruitment and retention. It's a long list-- some of the recommendations require money, others require simply adjusting some things and moving some things and some people around. I know that Rita Davis is hard at work as we speak on the implementation of that plan. That implementation, by the way, is going to take three years at least, but we are beginning it right now. I think that the Council on Postsecondary Education is clearly aware of all the work we have done on this. We are the only university to have identified recruitment and retention as high on our priority list. Other universities, for whatever reason, did not. Morehead thinks they have already figured it out and they already have a plan. So, they don't need the focus that we need, but in any event, we will eventually one way or another get substantial funds for recruitment/retention. Dr. Marsden can elaborate, but we also have people at work writing a Title III Grant and those are millions of dollars and some of those dollars could also be used for retention and some efforts.
Looking at the 2.4 percent budget increase in terms of how much flexibility that we have to use is a problem when it comes to determining salary increases and dealing with the great inequity that exists on this campus among our classified employees. A Buck Consultant's report, the firm out of St. Louis that we hired to examine how our classified staff ranks compared to the market place in the Bluegrass Region and in Madison County, indicates that the price tag is going to be significant. All I needed to hear was that one of our top secretaries in one our departments left this university last year at top salary of $23,000 and it doesn't take you very long to get your blood boiling over how could we ever have gotten this University in such a position that we would compensate somebody for 30 years of service at the end of tenure and facing retirement with a $23,000 base. So, I am committed to figuring out some way to address this issue in the upcoming budget. What's disappointing to me, is that it is not going to be easy, because of the 2.4 increase. In the past, prior to the Spring of 1998, when the increase in the budget came to Eastern, Western and Morehead, etc., the entire percentage, whatever it was, was left to the discretion of the campus community. In those days, President Funderburk would sit down and determine how to apportion those dollars. Again, it's 2.4 percent. We will have the opportunity to apportion and decide based on the preferences and the values and the priorities of this campus. The remainder are still priorities, but we have no choice: We either go after those dollars or we let some other university have them. In our case, if we look at the options, they are all things we care about and the Council has already given us the percentages that we will get on those.
Now concerning the Wellness Center. The strategic planning process of this University long before I came here identified the Wellness Center as one that students could use. It would be basically funded by the state, with contributions from both students and our private donors. The Wellness Center is a major priority for EKU because of the health statistics and the challenges on the health front in Eastern Kentucky, and we need a model center that will allow us literally to demonstrate to small communities across Eastern Kentucky that we will work for them. Secondly, our own students are in need of a center like that for a variety of reasons that are all obvious. And most importantly, it is a tremendous recruiting tool in an age when the student union has been replaced on most of the campuses that are moving forward in this country with a center like this which has literally become the center of student activity. So for those reasons, I think that is a very important priority and I am delighted to the tune of $7 million dollars the first biennium. We can expect at least that much in the second biennium. The cost of the building may range upwards to $22 to $25 million dollars. I have a substantial fund raising assignment on my hands. I have a meeting already scheduled. Vern Snyder and I will be meeting with a gentlemen who has significant business interests across Eastern Kentucky and who has expressed in helping us on this mission because he is seriously concerned about the health of Eastern Kentucky and thinks that this Wellness Center goes part of the way to address that. So, that's really good news that we've managed to get this. We are also, going to be sitting down with students to talk about the participation they can play here. When Western Kentucky University built their Wellness Center, a student fee was assessed early on to help build a fund that would provide a student contribution. That contribution, by the way, will pale in its significance, that is to say, we don't want to build this building at the expense of students. For the most part this is going to be a state appropriation and private donations, with a contribution from students along the way. The bad news on that building is that we are being told on a regular basis by the governor's office that this tax proposal he has included in the budget is really what this center is all about. The incentive funding and the Center, we're told by some, are the first to go if the governor does not get his tax increase. So, I guess for some of you that's maybe a good reason to vote for a tax increase. Certainly, the respective presidents' offices across the state have been reminded regularly, since the governor introduced his budget, how important it is for us to carry the message of the governor's tax plan far and wide and demonstrate to our colleagues and tax payers anywhere we can talk to them just how important it is that we do everything we can to pass this tax. We can certainly, along the way, make the argument for the necessity of those funds and frankly, I don't think they are bluffing on that one. I do think that if the governor doesn't get the tax increase they will have to go back and reexamine Eastern's budget, Morehead's budget and all the rest of the budget. By the way, on the 2.4 percent base funding. UK got 2.4, University of Louisville 2.4, Murray State received 2.4, Northern Kentucky received 10 percent, Western Kentucky receive 4-something percent and Morehead received 3 percent. Without detailed analysis, the reason for those discrepancies is that they documented the fact that Northern's percent of tuition that pays for Northern's budget is extraordinarily high. We are about 33 percent. Tuition accounts for about 33 percent of our budget and that is where the state wants us to be. Northern's is like 52 or 53 percent. They wanted to take some of the heat off of the students. There are some other reasons which has to do with the benchmark budgeting system. You saw the benchmarks we chose. Those benchmarks were carefully chosen by us; we literally chose the ones that were best funded per-student that we could find. Last week, we learned that the calculations from university to university differed, the Benchmark universities differed, our Benchmarks did not serve us as well. I will return in April to share the details of the budget.
Vern Snyder came to us from Youngstown State and is now our Vice President for University Advancement. Mr. Snyder began in July going through the foundation and found $300,000 of donor intent that was not being implemented. All of those dollars have been earmarked for academic performance scholarships. They have been earmarked for in-state, a few out-of-state, non-traditional and traditional students. We feel very good about being able to send a message to the larger community, to the Commonwealth, that we are raising the bar and attempting to attract students who have performed in a superior fashion academically in high school and can come forth and access these scholarships. I think that it will do much to increase the academic quality of the institution, to fill your classes with a few more students, in this case, who have performed well, and who perhaps would have gone somewhere else, had it not been for an opportunity to benefit from an academic scholarship, as opposed to the 70 percent of students who are some form of financial aid for financial reasons. And that of course, must be our first priority, to take care of need; but in addition to need, I think it's important also to deal with academic performance and we have done that.
In addition, the Foundation Board has authorized me to hire a firm, Meridian Communication, out of Lexington, to come in and take a look at Eastern and ask who we are and ask other people who see us from afar who we are, and come up with some kind of a composite on what Eastern stands for in the Commonwealth and what we offer to prospective students, and to sit down with constituencies, with stakeholders and come up with some consistent clear marketing and communications strategy. That would include everything with the mark, the logo, the Colonel. At the very least we need a contemporary Colonel. That's a small part of the project. This Wednesday, the firm will make its first visit to this institution. They will meet with a variety of people. The next time they come back, they want to meet with a focus group of faculty, a focus group of students, alumni, board members and probably a group of consumers. Most, importantly, of course, this is a ground-up exercise that relies on the body of expertise and knowledge, commitment and passion that each and every one of you have for this university, and it will only succeed with your cooperation. If you are interested in serving on the focus group, call the President's Office and give your name to his secretary. I would like to thank Vern Snyder for his help on the Foundation side because he made a big difference since he has been here.
We did receive a $25 million contribution and it will be used to equip the new Corbin building with the finest, most cutting-edge science labs you will find anywhere on our campus.
Lastly, there will be a faculty dance (Sock Hop) with a DJ, in early March."
REPORT FROM THE PROVOST: Senator Marsden
Dr. Marsden announced that the new director of Admissions is Mr. Steven Vern, who will be joining us March 1st. He is currently serving as a director of Undergraduate International Admissions at the University of Nebraska. He has also served as director of international programs at Graceland College. He has been a police officer and a business manager. We also have hired Mr. John Fish as director of Financial Aid.
Dr. Marsden reported that the Board of Regents has approved 12 sabbatical leaves for the year 2000-2001. That is up slightly from the previous year. With 700 faculty, we do need to work at getting more dollars available for sabbatical leaves so that the number will be much more appropriate for the size of our faculty. Later this year, we hope to host a workshop on preparing a successful sabbatical leave application. Professor Ordell Hill, is going on sabbatical year next year, but has also received the Senior Fellowship from the National Endowment for the Humanities, which is quite an accomplishment.
We are preparing a Title III Grant which is headed up by Dr. Karen Carey and a group of very dedicated people. The deadline for submission is February 18. If the grant is awarded, it would mean $350,000 a year for five years to essentially support our recruitment and retention efforts.
We are looking at the status of an early retirement option program. We have reviewed what has gone out of the past. When we are comfortable that we can bring forward a proposal for faculty discussion, then I will do that. At the present time, we are looking at some parameters for that program. The program probably will not last, in the sense of its duration, more than three years. We will probably not be able to announce it as effective before the summer of 2001, because there is a budget implication to that proposal which will include a certain faculty development piece. In other words, we will talking about a phase-down of teaching responsibilities, but also some additional faculty development support dollars which will be part of the program. We are aware that there are 150 faculty who are reaching retirement age. We are trying to come up with a program that will be attractive, and at the same time serve the institution's well-being. While the previous program was highly popular, it was also problematic from a couple of points of view.
A lot of the departments are just now realizing that one-half the the ERO disappeared and while the departments may think that those pieces are just waiting to be reassembled, in point of fact the five-year ERO option resulted in some departments losing positions that were either swept up in budget savings or combined with other half-pieces to create new positions in other departments. So it was a very effective planning device, but it did hold some departments hostage in terms of their particular staffing priorities. So we want to make sure that the new program we put forward is a very good planning device and also a very good academic planning device, at the same time. So I'll have more to say about that during the spring semester.
All of the Phase II proposals were approved by the Board of Regents and will begin implementing them as soon as possible, but certainly no later than July 1. We will also be talking about a program review process. We will have to have a series of conversations between the administration, faculty and the Board with regard to a program review process that will be on-going on an annual basis. The president and I, both agree that we ought to be bringing to the Board on an annual basis a list of programs that we have reviewed and reactions that we are recommending with regard to those programs. What we are looking for is a process that will be ongoing, equitable and complex in terms of its inclusiveness of the issues. The deans and I are working on a proposal that will bring to the Senate for a regular and annual review all of our programs. But it will not be a review process that will simply look at numbers; we will not allow that to occur. Certainly, we have to look at enrollment, graduation rates, look at costs per program in terms of cost per student credit-hour generated and so on, but we also have to look at the quality of our institution. We have to look at what kinds of programs this institution has to be offering if we are to call ourselves a major comprehensive institution. Again, more will follow during the semester.
Finally, our congratulations to the Women's Studies Program and all of the other offices, especially the office of the President, for hosting the visit of the writer, Mickey Giovanni last Thursday evening. It was a proud evening for Eastern Kentucky University. It's really events like that which remind us of what a university is really all about. Our congratulations to all those involved. Thank you.
Senator Sowders asked Senator Marsden whether there will be any announcement about the future of ERO this semester. He answered that "it's possible, but since it has budget implications, it would have to go to the Board at the next meeting, which is in April. Before that, however, we would have to hear what the state budget will be and whether we could afford to implement the program as we are envisioning it at this particular point." He added that, realistically, we should not expect that we can have a program in place before the summer of 2001.
REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND SENATE CHAIR: Senator Murray
We met on January 24th. One item that was discussed was the part-time representative for faculty Senate that was a carryover from last spring and efforts to recruit and serve in that capacity. The other item of significance is the motion regarding the posthumous degree.
REPORT OF THE FACULTY REGENT: Senator M. Thompson
Gary Abney was sworn in as a new regent. Mr. Abney has a background in banking and probably will serve on the Finance and Planning Committee. Officer's were elected. Jim Gilbert was re-elected to continue as chair. Ernie House was elected as vice chair replacing Barbara Rickey; Linda Kuhnhenn was elected as treasurer; Beverly Burris as secretary and Mary Davis as assistant secretary. There were no questions regarding the academic items that were sent through the Senate. The board chair commented on Bill Ellis' contributions to the University and to the community and his respect to the community and is very pleased with his new position as the first University Historian.
The Finance and Planning Committee will be meeting between now and April as Dr. Kustra has recommendations and issues to bring forth and maybe by that time, the Buck Report on staff salaries will be available. Libby Wachtel, Mark Wasicsko, and Dominick Hart gave excellent presentations on topics related to their area. Dr. Wasicsko and Dr. Hart presented an historic collaborative work between the colleges and represented us very well. The next meeting will be held on a weekday, Friday, April 28.
REPORT FROM THE COSFL Representative: Senator Harley
Senator Janssen reported for Senator Harley. On Saturday, January 8, COSFL met in Frankfort at the CPE board room. CPE President Gordon Davies and four CPE staff met with us for the first half of the meeting. The budget for the Postsecondary Education, the CPE presented to the governor was discussed in length and in detail. As Dr. Kustra mentioned, the governor's adjustments since that time included the addition of our campus Wellness Center, which of course, is dependent upon the General Assembly passing the money for it. Dr. Gordon Davies said what he thought the pressure points would in the General Assembly. He stated that he considered the endowment matches and the competitive nature of the programs such as the Model Schools of Education were negotiable in his point of view, but he was going to hold firm on the requirement of a money match for UK and U of L research and on space. COSFL and CPE staff discussed the role of faculty and lobbying. It was agreed that COSFL had been successful in the past when focused on an issue and speaking in accord on that issue. The CPE staff suggested two bills as examples of what COSFL might want to lobby to support. One was a high school foreign language requirement and the other early math testing for feedback on two high school students for preparation for those students to come to college.
CPE offered reported on some of the work of the P-16 council, which will be renamed as the Commission. The P-16 council is composed of the Kentucky Department of Education and CPE members and staff. It is not mandated, but instead a voluntary collaboration of these two different groups to provide more of an alignment between the public schools and our university. The P-16 initiatives at the moment include Math and English alignment teams. The focus is to be getting more students to attend college with less need for remediation. The state level P-16 council will be encouraging us and offering to assist us in setting up regional P-16 council school systems in the area. Dr. Davies discussed the way in which CPE is going to look at non-productive programs by asking a series of questions of programs that have very few graduates over a five year period. He gave examples of reasons why a program should continue to exist even though it has a small number of graduates. We will have an opportunity to reassess small programs and convey to CPE the reasons why these programs are needed. A motion that COSFL write a statement of support of the CPE budget on Postsecondary Education did not have a great deal of support. There was much discussion. Instead COSFL is writing a statement expressing their appreciation of CPE's efforts in areas such as increasing collaboration and their ongoing exchange of information with COSFL. The group had some issues with the budget, but did not feel that we could say this is great about every feature of the budget, although we support in general the CPE funding for higher education. While we wish to support CPE's efforts to get money for higher education, many members have some fundamental questions about the budget in the way that all of the universities would or would not receive money. Important issues include the built in competition among universities for funds and the requirement for universities to come up with funds to match the state funds. It is agreed that we need to actively support CPE efforts to get increased funding for all Postsecondary Education. COSFL did pose to send a letter to Kevin Nowland at Kentucky Department of Education and the decision of the originators not to use the term "evolution". The letter states why the use of alternative terms or any alternative terms does not provide our students with the knowledge that they need. After a brief discussion of shared governance, we agreed to have an in-depth discussion of the topic at the next meeting, March 11 unless the activity in Frankfort indicates a meeting in February.
REPORT FROM THE STUDENT SENATE: Mr. Pace
Mr. Pace announced that the student Senate has just passed a new constitution for the Student Government Association. The most pertinent change is a by-laws clause which basically allows us to make minor changes when they arise without having to go through the formality of the Board of Regents. Also, the new constitution will provide freshman representation which will instill new blood and new ideas in the student government. Last week, we passed a parking resolution. We will begin making available to the Faculty Senate any bills and legislation that we are working on. The Board of Student Body Presidents across the state will be coming to tour EKU on March 3 and 4. On February 23, at 7:30 p.m. in the Grise Room, Combs Building, we will have our first public forum for the Council on Minority Affairs which has been set up through the Student Senate. If you need information, you may call 622-1724. In the past, we have had vacant positions on the Student Senate. This year, we currently have five open positions but have received 16 applications and will be able to fill the positions.
REPORTS FROM STANDING COMMITTEES:
Committee on Elections. Senator McAdams reported that in May we will vote in a part-time person to serve on Faculty Senate. She asked that everyone be looking and asking for nominees who would be willing to serve on the Faculty Senate.
Committee on Committees. Senator Taylor not present. No report.
Committee on the Rules. Senator Chambers announced that the committee met on January 24. The subject of the meeting was the role the Faculty Senate should play in matters of University reorganization. This was the motion sent forward by Senator Schlomann. At this point, the committee is surveying a total of 35 universities, 19 of those are benchmark institutions. Of the 35, only 20 institutions had language in the faculty handbooks for Senate involvement in restructuring the organizations. At this point, we are collating the material and it will be available for discussion at the March 6 meeting.
Committee on the Budget. Senator Andersen - no report.
Committee on Faculty Rights and Responsibilities. Senator Steinbach - no report.
REPORTS FROM AD HOC COMMITTEES:
There may be a preliminary report in March from Senator O'Connor on workload and also, the Ad Hoc Committee on tuition benefits. We had established another ad hoc committee but that was revisited and sent forth to the president for the domestic partner matter, which is in progress. If no reports in March, there will be an update on the status and progress at the April meeting.
Ad Hoc Committee on Child Care Services on Campus: Senator Kopacz mentioned that the motions that are being presented are aimed to set up the mechanics for oversight and enforcement of the proposals. There was some discussion on the clarity and coverage of the motions. Concern was expressed that the Center would not be opened on days when classes are not in session.
Senator Maynard supported the motion and mentioned that the state is also looking at maintaining strict regulations on day care centers.
Dr. Wachtel was asked by Dr. Kustra to meet with Dr. Kopacz and Dr. Maynard to determine if there was an existing contract. After careful research, it has been determined that there is no contract or memorandum of agreement.
Senator Kustra offered a friendly amendment in regard to Motion III-- that the Day Care Center be under the administrative office at the Burrier Building under the direction of the Department of Family and Consumer Sciences.
There was discussion regarding the number of faculty/parent ratio on the Advisory Council.
The motion on the floor was to approve Motion I with subcategory I-Advisory Council to be interpreted as being at the discretion of the administrative office, and with motion III, the specific administrative office to be identified as the chair of Family and Consumer Science. Motion passed.
Chair Murray thanked Dr. Kopacz and her committee for their diligent work.
Chair Murray introduced the motion to approve the request for awarding a posthumous degree. Senator Harley, representing the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate, moved that the Faculty Senate approve the request to award a posthumous degree of Bachelor of Arts to Ms. Aymara Castillo at the May 2000 Commencement. Senator Janssen seconded the motion. No discussion. Chair Murray stated that this request comes out of the appropriate channels that were established at the November meeting. Motion passed.
Chair Murray called for the Council on Academic Affairs materials. Senator Marsden asked that the Council on Academic Affairs materials be accepted in one motion. Senator Harley made the motion that the entire package be accepted. Senator Kilgore seconded the motion.
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s),Technology - Printing Management (B.S.) Area Major
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), Administration, Counseling, and Educational Studies
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), Physical Education - Physical Education (BS) Option: Sports Supervision
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), Submitted by Physical Education - Athletic Training Option: Criteria for Admissions
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), Physical Education - Physical Education (BS) Option: Wellness
- Suspend Option(s) Within A Degree Program, Physical Education - Physical Education Option: Adult Physical Fitness
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), English - M.A. in English (change in program requirements)
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), English - MA in English (change in admission requirements)
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), English - MA in English (change in language requirements)
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), Psychology - Psychology (BS)
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), Submitted by Psychology - Clinical Psychology Program
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), Speech Communication & Theatre Arts - Alternative Dispute Resolution
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), MBA Program - MBA Program Requirements
- New Degree Program, Special Education - Interdisciplinary Early Childhood Education - Special Education Early Childhood
- Revision In Certificate, Special Education - Professional Certificate for Director of Special Education
- Revision In Degree Program And/Or Option(s), Loss Prevention & Safety - BS in Insurance and Risk Management
For the record, Senator O'Connor questioned the dropping of economics from the Master of Arts program and suggested that the reason that it was dropped is that the majority of benchmark institutions did not require economics. He said, "We did some checking on that and found half did and half didn't. Which would not suggest a majority." Senator Marsden stated that was an issue of some contention, certainly at the Council on Academic Affairs. Senator McKinnon spoke in opposition to dropping the foreign language requirement from the MA program in English. Senator McKinnon stressed the importance of studying any language other than one's own native language, since this very strongly enhances one's command of language in itself.
The third open forum will be a week from Thursday, February 17, 2000, Jaggers Room. Chair Murray thanked those that participated in the open forums. The forums have presented a very professional and collegiate atmosphere.
Chair Murray recognized new senators, Charlotte Rich, Department of English and Jim Moreton, Department of Speech and Theatre.
Senator Dunston addressed the seating arrangement and Senator Janssen suggested that an aisle be added.
Chair Murray announced that Senate minutes and the agenda will be transmitted henceforth only via e-mail.
Senator Jones indicated that the number-one way that computer viruses are transmitted are through attachments and via group lists. Is it possible to send body text e-mails instead of attachments?
Senator Marsden moved to adjourn. The Senate adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
James Robert Miller
Faculty Senate Secretary