Skip to main content

Minutes for April 3, 2000

The Faculty Senate of Eastern Kentucky University met on Monday, April 3, 2000 in the South Room of the Keen Johnson Building. Senator Murray called the seventh meeting of the academic year to order at 3:30 p.m.

The following members of the Senate were absent:

R. Rink M.A. Robinson G. Schick*
S. Stephens* R. Thompson M. Willingham

*denotes prior notification of absence to the Faculty Senate Secretary

Visitors to the Senate were: Karen Sue Cain, MSCS; Gladys Johnson, Co-op; Linda Turner, CHS; Nancy Kenner, CHS; Jacinta Feldman, The Eastern Progress; Stephen Byrn, Admissions; Libby Wachtel, Academic Affairs-Planning and Programming Coordination; Jack Dyer, MBA Program; Dominick Hart, A&S; David Gale, CHS; Aaron Thompson, Ant/Soc/Soc Work


Senator Murray called for approval of the minutes of March 6, 2000. Any additions, deletions or corrections. There being none, the minutes were approved as distributed.

Senator Murray gave a special thank you to Senator Flanagan for filling in her absence and keeping her informed.


The legislature has adjourned and has left us without a budget. A smaller group of legislators are meeting as we speak and will continue to meet into next week, and they will attempt to put together a budget in this interim period. At the moment, it is still possible that we could emerge with UK, UL and some of the other comprehensive universities with base increase funding above the 2.4 and the 2.4 that a good number of us were dealt in the earlier budget that was acted upon by the Senate.

To refresh your memory, the budget looked like we were going to get 2.7 in the first year of the biennium and 3.7 in the second year of the biennium when it left the House into the Senate, and that was when the package included the governor's telecommunication or telephone tax. By the time the Senate Republicans took it, they decided they didn't want any taxes, and they came out with this strong pitch against taxes and they through out the 2.7 and 3.7, went back to the CPE's original recommendation of 2.4 and 2.4 and that is where it stands at the moment. So, even though it stands at 2.4 and 2.4, it is my understanding from some conversations that I had as late as this morning that there is still the opportunity for the small group of legislators who are meeting to come up with some more reasonable numbers such as 2.7 and 3.7. I really don't know where this is going to go. I think some in Frankfort are just hopeful there is going to be a budget at all, instead of having the governor turn around in May and call a special session or whatever his powers are under the Kentucky Constitution. But I will keep you posted.

Last year we tried to expand the normal budget process and we definitely intended to expand it this year. Your provost has had conversations with me about including you, all faculty, in on discussions and decisions on the budget. The Board of Regents and I have been discussing well, as long as I have been here, how we can involve some of them more directly in the budget. They felt for a number of years that they were frozen out of budget process and really didn't have much to say until we presented them with the final number hours before they were asked to approve it. Well, that's not fair to them as those who govern us and it's not fair to you as those who should be building the budget. I must say, this particular year is going to challenge us all as we try to meet those two goals of ours, because timing is going to be such that by the time we get word on how much we get, we'll probably have days, I hope not hours, but at least days to make the final decision. So there will be some last minute scurrying around trying to find folks from chairs to deans and others who will be called upon in those final moments to help us put this thing together.

I might comment on one issue that is critical to us here at Eastern and I have reached no decision on it. How can you reach a decision when you don't know what the numbers are? Some of you have heard me discuss this issue before, and I might as well, lay it on the table and perhaps you would have some feedback for me and others involved in this process over the next few weeks. I don't have to tell you that my predecessor, Dr. Funderburk, did an excellent job of taking the faculty salaries at Eastern to the top of the Kentucky benchmarks. I think if you look today at where faculty salaries are at Eastern, you will find that they are just a hair above Western Kentucky University's salaries on a general level. Now, if you start taking apart rank, you'll find differences I'm sure and maybe, Eastern falls down a bit on one rank but then rises up on another. But overall, the conventional wisdom which I think can be backed up by some pretty solid research shows that Eastern has dealt itself a pretty good hand when it comes to faculty salaries compared with our counterparts at the rest of the comprehensive universities. There is a price you pay for doing that over the years, and some of you are aware of that and some of you may not be. It has certainly been brought to my attention, because for the last year and a half I have the longest list of to do's, and "Gee, I wish I had the money and gee, I wish I could fund this program and gee, I wish we could have a lecture series and gee, I wish we could have this." I mean there is a lot of things around this campus that we have not been able to do by virtue of where this one priority lies. But there is one area that is much more important than a lecture series and is much more important than a few added programs here and there and that's the staff salaries. And the fact of the matter is for years staff salaries here have been ignored and we are way behind. And that is the reason why I asked this consulting firm of Buck and Company out of St. Louis, Human Resource Consultants to come in take a look at where the market place is in the Bluegrass Region in Madison County and how do we compare. I must tell you that I don't really need a market place study when the other day as I was leading a meeting on Friday afternoon one of our chairs came up to me and said, "Look, this year if you have to make a priority, put the staff first. It's O.K. with me. I have a secretary who has just hit her 15th year here and she is just now making $20,000 a year." I think I have shared with some you some of the other concerns I've heard expressed around campus as far as staff salaries are concerned. We really must do something about that. The Buck Consultant's price tag is $1.2 million. We are not going to be able to deal with that in one year, I guarantee you, we'll have to phase that in over a period of time. But we owe it to the entire campus community now that we have done fairly well on faculty salaries to address also the issue of equity in staff salaries. And again, I'd be curious to get--I've had some reaction already as you can tell--but I'd like other reactions as well as to how you might think we deal with this especially in a difficult year. That is what makes this particularly challenging. If this was one of those years where we, like Northern Kentucky University, was getting a 10 percent increase in our base, this would not be a problem. Everyone would benefit and all boats would rise with the tide. That is not possible in a year where so many comprehensives and even UK and U of L have been held to these very low increases in the base budget.

Now I want to remind you that the good news is that in the second year of the biennium we will be able to access a number of incentive funds that will make for a much healthier budget situation, and we will have no complaints in the second biennium. But it is the first of this biennium that seems to be a stumbling block. I will keep you posted and try to give you as much information as I can get my hands on and in as timely a fashion as possible.

One other thing that I would like to mention today, I know that one of the items on the agenda is the Admissions Standards. I leave it to all of you to structure those standards in such a way that we can continue here at Eastern Kentucky University meeting the mission of this University, while at the same time improving the academic quality of our students, our programming and our faculty. I do want to share with you a perspective on this issue, and I wish I could share it with you in whole. That is, I wish I could share it with you when it was completed, but it is not, but given the moment of the timing here, I felt it important that I at least give you a little insight into what we are doing. As you may remember, I talked about the fact that we have engaged the firm of Meridian Communications to do a look at Eastern from the inside, from the outside, and tell us who we are. They have begun a series of focus groups. And just two weeks ago, they isolated a group of juniors in high school in the Bluegrass Region. Brought them together in the focus group and asked them a series of questions about Eastern Kentucky University, about Centre College, about UK, about all of the schools in the region and just engaged in a discussion like focus groups do, trying to learn beyond the limitations of a survey just what students felt as they heard and took in information about Eastern Kentucky University. I might add by the way, that we are doing this with alumni, we are going to be doing it with faculty and staff. We are all going to get a report by the end of summer--and I'll probably report on it in full at the convocation in August. It is going to tell us just about everything we need to know about who the rest of the world thinks we are. We all think we have a pretty good idea of who we are, but let us see what the rest of the world thinks. Some of it is going to be very predictable and you could have probably figured it out without paying Meridian Communications.

I think in other areas, there are going to be some real insights delivered here to us. One of the areas where the students clearly responded was on the area of admissions. And I just asked the office of University Advancement if they'd give me a couple of quotes of the students who kicked off the discussion. There was considerable focus on this issue of admissions. One student says, "Admissions is totally open, people have said that they aren't even going to take the ACT, because they are just going to Eastern." Another student says, "If a student with a 14 ACT thinks she can get in and survive, then am I going to be challenged." Well, I'm not going to go through the list, there are even some of these quotes that unfortunately and most inaccurately transfer the admissions problem over to quality of faculty and literally blame Eastern for quality problems on the faculty side generated by the admissions. That makes no sense to me how you get from one to the other, but we are talking about street talk, we're talking about conventional wisdom. Unfortunately, we are talking about what goes into lots of parents and students who sit down around the kitchen table to decide where their youngster is going to go to school. I've looked over those admissions standards very carefully, and I think they are most fair. I think they set some standards, but of course if you read carefully they also allow us to continue serving the historical mission of this University by giving special consideration to students who we honestly believe in spite of their test scores, in spite of their academic preparation in high school, still have a chance to make it here at Eastern Kentucky University. Again, I would never want this University's policies or procedures to be driven by public relations, but I do think when students, perspective students, talk we should be listening. And again, I'm sorry, I don't have the conclusions or the results of this long term, basically six month analysis of who Eastern really is, but you all will get a chance to see it sooner or later.

Finally, let me tell you that tomorrow sometime, maybe Wednesday morning, we will have a new basketball coach at Eastern Kentucky University. I know that doesn't spark an interest in every last one of you, but I've come to learn since I've been here in Kentucky that there is something about basketball that sinks deeply into the psyche and the culture of Kentuckians no matter where they come from. And I have learned that no matter whether you like this or not or I like this or not--I frankly, get a big charge out of it and enjoy basketball here at Eastern and in Kentucky--that it to a large degree defines Eastern, it certainly defines UK, no one can dispute that. And I think the decision that we have made is one that is really exciting for Eastern Kentucky University. I'm not at the liberty at the moment, since there are still lawyers involved with things like contracts to discuss this, but I am truly excited about it and the only reason I bring it up to all of you today is to encourage you once you hear of the announcement and the press conference to join us. I was so impressed when we hired Jeff Long and we had a press conference in the Walnut Hall room that so many faculty from so many corners of the university came to join us to demonstrate the fact that we are indeed a campus family, and whether we are enjoying the outstanding jazz that was presented to us last Friday night or honoring honor students as we did yesterday afternoon or enjoying a good basketball game in the middle of the week, it's all part of learning and living here at Eastern Kentucky University. So I do invite you all when we know when this press conference is--we don't even know that at the moment, we just know who is going to be there--and if you could join us, we would so much like to have you part of this big event. Again, in addition to the great work you do to bring credit to Eastern Kentucky University so does the Athletic Program as we know it and love it here at EKU. If there are any questions about the budget, I don't the answers, but I'd be glad to listen to your questions and if there is anything else you'd like to add.

I, as you know, have had a continuing interest in reaching out to high schools in our region and even beyond our regions to talk to students about coming to Eastern, talk to students about college choices, talk to students about their futures. I have just completed my 23rd high school visit in Northern Kentucky, quite removed from our region, but I'll be back down in the southern reaches of our region in a couple of weeks, all the way down to the Tennessee border, as a matter of fact. I have had a great time of meeting principals, faculty and students. Of course, the students are just a real kick, because when you talk to the sophomores and especially juniors and a few seniors this time of the year, they are starting to click. They are starting to get a little concerned about where they are going to go, whether they've taken the right courses, what kind of testing is required, what they need to get in, how they need to stay in, and all of those questions are questions that you and I can answer for them. In as much as I enjoy doing this, you've heard me say before that I would like to have some help. So we now are beginning our very first step and that is we now have a Web Survey, a survey on the home page that will allow you to share with us where you've been and what you've done in the high schools across Kentucky. That's our first step in documenting where we are and helping us decide where we would like to go. And then the second step that I hope we can kick off in the fall would be a good number of faculty visits. And what I mean by that is--and I know sometimes when you are here on campus working with students you probably don't think of the enormous impact you can have on an even younger student's life--but for high school students taking chemistry, they don't understand the linkage between learning and earning. And in order for them to understand--and if you'll forgive me that they don't understand the theoretical advantage of your disciplines, forgive me that they would like to here where your students are heading-they would love the stories about the successes you can tell of your students. And so, to the extent that you can share a future in chemistry with a student who is a junior taking chemistry, wow, that means a great deal to them. To the extent, that you can share with a student taking American history, what that history major means in college and where it has taken some of your students, wow, now you have connected for them in a very, very significant fashion. I've seen their eyes light up. I've seen their enthusiasm as we discuss what these degrees and programs we offer here on this campus mean in terms of their future and the contributions to the community, the state, and the nation. And so, as I said, while you can take the first step of filling out the survey, if you can even think longer and harder about actually helping us, we will of course, be able to provide you by next fall the assistance you need to choose the right school, and how you go about accessing it. We will have it all lined up. We will do the heavy lifting if you will, but boy, I tell you, it is just a lot of fun and a great experience and most important of all it will add to the most important mission all of us in higher education here in Kentucky have right now. And it's not, it is not--while making UK one of the top 20 public research universities is important--I'm on board that it is not the most mission of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The most important mission of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, which every one of us must buy into, is to increase the number of students who are leaving Kentucky high schools and enrolling in colleges and universities in this state or outside of this state. And you can help them make that decision. You can take the high school graduating classes in some of these counties I am meeting in, of 45 to 50 percent of students going on to college--that's right, 45 to 50 percent in some of the counties that we serve-- is as high as graduating students get those moving over into college. We need to get that up to 60, 70, 75 percent. That's not just the problem of parents back home or high school teachers back home. I think that is also our responsibility. I think that is the way the Commonwealth is designing it, and I am absolutely confident that you and I can make that difference. Thank you very much for your attentiveness and again, if you have any questions, I would be glad to answer them.


This past weekend was one of the most marvelous weekends at Eastern Kentucky University where the entire campus seemed alive. My compliments to Professor Ray Tennant of our Department of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science for hosting an informative and enthusiastic meeting of the Kentucky Section of the Mathematical Association of American this past weekend. Well done, Ray.

And congratulations to Jonathan Martin and the EKU Jazz Band for a marvelous evening of jazz music. This year's EKU Jass Festival, with its mix of our outstanding students and renown jazz artists, will remain one of the points of EKU pride for years to come.

Sunday was marked by a large gathering of students and parents for the annual Honors Day Program in Keen Johnson. The ballroom was filled for a luncheon and awards ceremony which was followed by college recognitions and receptions. And Sunday evening was capped by the Phi Kappa Phi Initiation Ceremony and Banquet.

This past First Weekend was indeed a celebration of academic achievement at EKU.

An "Approved Graduation Regalia" document which was approved by the Council on Academic Affairs, which is an expansion of the academic regalia that will be permitted at commencement. It is distributed for Faculty Senate information. This will be implemented for Spring 2000 commencement. This information will be in the commencement booklet so that people in the audience will know what the insignia represent.

Also, a timetable for General Education Review for your information and, hopefully, your approval. It is a timetable for discussion and action for program review. This proposal has been circulated widely and has been discussed widely on campus. The Senate Executive Committee and I began to discuss the timetable, and I followed through with the General Education Review Committee this past week. It represents their best thinking on a reasonable timetable for on- campus discussions of these proposals and a reasonable timetable for action and implementation. I sincerely hope you look this over and let us know if you any major objections to this. We think that this is a reasonable timetable to proceed on. We are much encouraging open and free exchange of ideas about the general education program proposals. And while we certainly encourage conversation to be held among and between individuals on a regularly basis, we would urge all of you have something to share to put these up on the web site. To work through Gary Kuhnhenn and to make sure that those comments and suggestions that you have receive the widest possible airing.

We will be working on a major revision of the Faculty Handbook this summer. I am in the process of assembling a working committee to assist me in the process. I am fully aware that a lot of the revisions will be things that we will want to bring to the Faculty Senate in the fall for discussion and, where appropriate, action. So, I am hopeful that by the fall we will be able to present to you some significant revisions in the way in which we do business as an institution in Academic Affairs. Again, I think there will be plenty of opportunity for discussion of those as we move into the fall semester. While this will result in a delay in the publication of a new Faculty Handbook, the product will be a stronger one. Meanwhile, we will continue to operate under the existing handbook.

Also, I am circulating, at this point, for your information, it will come to you I hope later on as an action item. It is a draft proposal for EKU Degree Completion for Accomplished Professionals. We have been discussing in recent weeks the potential for allowing some individuals who left the institution after considerable study here at Eastern Kentucky University, not to transfer to another institution for the sake of completion of an undergraduate degree, but rather to pursue a professional degree in medicine or law, to return to receive a undergraduate diploma from Eastern Kentucky University. This is a potential policy for implementing that goal of allowing some degree completion to occur for accomplished professionals.

I would like at this time to yield the floor to Dr. Libby Wachtel for remarks about the program review process which is being planned for EKU in consultation with faculty and staff.

Dr. Libby Wachtel: At the last Faculty Senate meeting, draft material for beginning examination of the development of program review process was distributed, and unfortunately I was not able to be at that senate meeting. I want to take this opportunity to briefly let you know where we will be going with this. There will be a memo going out to all faculty the middle of next week that will essentially outline where I want to move us in terms of development of a program review process. I think all of you are aware of the productivity review process that CPE has asked us to do and we do have a response due to the Council on May 8th. But that is not an academic program review process in the way that most of us think about that. You can't do that in the course of essentially two months. As best as I can determine, we have had in the past a fairly formal academic review process for programs, but it has not been something that is currently active. So we need to reestablish a comprehensive and formal review process, and as I said, a letter will be going out to all faculty, including deans and chairs, as well, in which we will attach the material that was distributed at the Faculty Senate last month. That material has been adapted from Western Kentucky University with their permission. It is presented to you and the faculty as a starting-point review process here at Eastern. There is some material which came from a long range planning committee that was established in the past. I think some of you may have served on it. I have resurrected it out of some files and in it is a discussion about criteria that we might want to adopt in terms of continuation, discontinuation of programs and so forth.

What we will do with the draft material that is being circulated is use the model that is being used with general education. It will be posted on the web site and all of this should be done by the end of the week. I will be inviting comments from any faculty member over the next month of April and to the end of this semester. Dr. Marsden has appointed a small advisory task force to work with me. The task force consists of Dr. Harley who will be representing the Faculty Executive Senate Committee, John Gump from Business and Technology, Karen Sehmann from Arts and Sciences, Irena Sodderstrom from Justice and Safety, and I am still working to contact the individuals from the College of Health Sciences and the College of Education. These individuals have agreed to work with me to take the feedback and so forth that we will receive from the draft materials that are out. We will work through the summer to incorporate any responses and concerns that have come from the faculty and then, in early fall we will schedule two open public forums to receive additional comments on what I would hope would be close to a final process, with the goal of submitting a program review process for the appropriate approvals probably in late September through the month of October. So that is what we are going to do in order to then be able to say, obviously, I think as we all would that we do have a formal process by which we will routinely and on a systematic basis examine all of our degree programs. Be looking for both email and hard copy of the memo and additional copies of the draft material.

Senator Flanagan asked the question, what form is the response taking that we are sending back to this early deadline of May 8th on this process by the CPE?

Dr. Wachtel: The instructions from CPE asked that we put programs below the very arbitrary degree productivity level into four categories: (1) eliminate program; (2) continue program in current form; (3) the program should be continued, but needs to be restructured in some way; and (4) further study. I am working with the deans and the deans are working with the department chairs for those programs that have been identified. Quite frankly, the majority of the programs from the responses I have gotten so far are, "we think these programs are fine the way they are." The Council identified one level, the degree productivity, and have ignored the complexity of what most of know is involved in the decisions of whether we want to continue degree programs. As an example of the types of rationale that I am receiving--and I am very pleased with the responses that are coming forward from the colleges--are things like the two-year degree programs, a number of them have been identified; however, the Council fails to point out or we need to point out to the Council that these two year degree programs for the most part are ladders for four-year degree programs, and the four-year degree programs in almost all cases are producing graduates well in access of the arbitrary level. I can't imagine that the Council, although I can't speak for them, really seriously wants to eliminate the only two-year degree program in Emergency Medical Technician in the eastern part of the state. We have programs that are unique, we have programs that obviously are serving specific missions. And that is the nature of responses that we are getting. The Council staff will be here sometime in May or June to let us know what they think of our responses. I think we will know then, and I would expect that they would ask in some cases that we do further review and perhaps in such a way that we will have to do something before the program approval is in place, but I think that those will be the nature of our responses.

Dr. Marsden: There are two other items that I want to put on the table. I have enjoyed working with the Senate this year and would enjoy working with the Senate more if they would meet more. I suggest to the Senate that you seriously consider the possibility of having more frequent meetings, because I believe that having the Senate meet once a month causes a problem in the sense that is does not allow us in some cases to move things through a little more quickly, but it also does not allow us have the kinds of discussion and reflection that might be more appropriate if we had meetings. It doesn't necessarily have to be twice a month, it could be every three weeks for example as another compromise. I do believe think it would appropriate to introduce topics for discussion at one meeting and action at another meeting, however, and therefore, that would only be possible if we had more frequent meetings than currently is the case. So I would like to throw that out for your consideration. Second, I know a lot of you are probably not particularly interested in revisited the issue of the moratorium of the use of the IDEA forms, but I will tell you there is still a great deal of confusion among your colleagues as to how this is to be precisely implemented next year and for the next several years. I believe that Senator Murray and others have done a very good job of clarifying the policy, but I think implementation of the policy remains a mystery to a lot of individuals and does affect the promotion, tenure and merit of a number of individuals in this institution. I therefore urge the Faculty Senate to form a task force to decide and suggest ways and means of meeting both the intent of the moratorium and also policy realities within the various departmental bylaws is something that we have the responsibility to go forward with. I believe a task force would accomplish this within a relative short period of time and provide good guidance for our faculty and the administration of the institution to implement a policy which was passed last spring, but again, is still causing confusion among the faculty. If you have any questions, I will be happy to answer them.


During the interim, the Executive Committee met twice on March 13 and March 27. In a wide ranging discussion on academic issues, it was suggested that Senator Marsden's report should contain comments on the general education proposal, the response to the CPE reviews, the future plans for campus program reviews, tenure with regard to new departmental chairs, and plans for revision for the Faculty Hand book. Brought before the Senate for its consideration would be the motion to approve the new Admissions Criteria. Senator Anderson presented the Executive Committee a new direction or change for the Budget Committee. Instead of the inter-institutional budget comparisons, which are about two years out of date when we get them, the focus will be on providing input to the Provost/Academic Vice President on a variety of budget priority issues before the budget process is complete.

Considering the very general wording regarding the charge of the Budget Committee it was deemed unnecessary to make any changes in the bylaws to accommodate this new focus.

Plans were made to place the issue of the EKU degrees for distinguished professionals on the May agenda and preliminary plans were discussed concerning the late April reception for orientation of new faculty members. No date has been set at this time.


Senator Thompson reported on the meeting to the American Governing Board Association which was held this year in New Orleans. Senator Thompson: In the past, the Board has not attended these meetings very often. When Dr. Kustra came aboard, he supported this immediately. We had six board members who attended. It was in New Orleans. We had members who attended topics on board assessments, committee structure and function on the board, the communication that goes on in the board, and there was some informal discussion about needs that we need to address perhaps in a retreat this summer. There was also a session on Planning for Recession in Good Times. It was a good discussion about public institutions and their coming to those times, and we are looking at some of those right now. There was a creative conclusion-- which was to save money for a rainy day. There was some discussion with what you have to do with the "balance and the dance" of not giving a message to your legislatures that you have a lot of money while you are saving for that rainy day.

Following President Kustra's comment on his interaction with schools, there was some good sessions on the role of universities in P-16 education, since this is a nation wide issue. Campus wide responsibility was discussed a lot, particularly the relationship between the Arts and Sciences College and the College of Education. In fact, with the most of the sessions that we attended, EKU is very much in the middle of all of these things and seems to be on a good track.

Presidential Assessment and Compensation was another pre-conference session. The bottom line is that you need to plan, and the plan should be one that fosters growth and is built on solid process and rationale. There was also a session on changing admissions requirement. Looking at what we are dealing with here, it is a nation wide problem for some universities like us.

It was a good professional meeting and there was quite a bit of time for us to interact informally.

Remember that we are having a board meeting on campus on the last Friday of the month and information will be sent out about that.

REPORT FROM THE COSFL Representative: Senator Falkenberg

COSFL met on March 11, 2000 in the Young Library at the University of Kentucky. An ad hoc committee was established to review the COSFL position paper, "Faculty Participation in University Governance". This paper was adopted in December 1986 and COSFL wishes to determine if it needs to be updated. Dr. John Flanagan will serve on that committee. Several representatives brought copies of Senate By-laws, faculty handbooks and similar documents on faculty governance. Discussion of this topic was deferred to the next meeting when all institutional materials should be available. The representatives discussed several practices for evaluating administrators. At Western Kentucky University, the Faculty Senate conducts a survey each spring that asks faculty to evaluate the president and also asks questions concerning attitudes toward Western Kentucky University. At Murray, 322 full-time teaching faculty, 85% participating in a recent evaluation of the president's leadership conducted by their Faculty Senate. Northern Kentucky University evaluates the performance of senior academic administrators every two years and completed an evaluation of the president last year.

David Cone, from Northern Kentucky University, raised a question as to whether other schools have placed restrictions on the content of e-mail messages. Most schools reported similar policies which speaks specifically to harassment issues and are very similar to EKU's policy.

The group very briefly discussed the most recent developments in the budget making process in Frankfort.

The next meeting of COSFL will be at Eastern Kentucky University and will be on April 15. COSFL is also considering the possibility of a full day meeting at a state park in May or early June.


Mr. Pace not present. No report.


Committee on Elections: Senator McAdam commented that we are still looking for new senators. She passed around a sheet for faculty to list new senators. We are also still looking for part-time faculty to run for Faculty Senate. April 12th is the deadline. We do not have any names yet.

Committee on Committees: Senator Taylor reported that the Committee on Committees met in March. In the past, we have sent memos to the deans to have the self nomination forms distributed to the chairs and then the chairs would distribute these forms to the faculty. However, this process hindered the distribution process. Dr. Marsden agreed to distribute these forms directly from his office. The self-nomination forms should be in your mailboxes now. They are due April 14 to members of the committee, which include Senator Huebner, Senator Johnson, Senator Virgin, Senator Willingham, and Senator Taylor. The Committee on Committees will meet April 20 and structure the final report.

Committee on the Budget: Senator Anderson reported that the Budget Committee consists of Senator Flanagan, Senator Jones, Senator Rahimzadeh, Senator Rink, and Senator Wasicsko. This committee has been meeting on a regular basis during the 1999-2000 year. The primary focus of the committee is to determine how this budget committee can serve the Faculty Senate in a proactive rather than a reactive manner in the University budgeting process.

For the past several years, the Committee has provided each year a written budget report in which the previous year's budget was compared against the expenditures from the years prior to that. However, there was no existing avenue for the Committee to give direct input into the budgeting process before the budget was established or was approved. The Committee did consider comparing EKU's expenditures in specific budget categories to the same categories of our new EKU benchmark institutions. However, this was again determined to be reacting to existing budgets or expenditures rather than giving input into the budget process. The chair of the Committee, along with Senator Jones and I, met with the Provost. Dr. Marsden commented that the committee's concerns regarding input rather than reaction were good and requested that he would like to meet with the Committee to give his ideas as to how we might be able to give our input into the budgeting process. We then met again to discuss Dr. Marsden's request and also, to see what the handbook said regarding the purpose of the Budgeting Committee to see if what we were proposing was in violation.

As Senator Flanagan mentioned, I met with the Executive Committee of the Senate to share with them the direction the Budget Committee plans to go. The Committee held a special meeting with Dr. Marsden and he suggested that the Committee assist him in establishing his priorities that would be recommended for funding during the budgeting process for the 2000-2001 year. Since the increase in the budget is minimal, this year's priorities will need to be established. Some of the possible priorities discussed by Dr. Marsden (and these again, are only examples) were: (1) proposed upgrading support of the staff salaries, (2) decreasing the high amount of premiums for families covered by EKU's health insurance policies, (3) increasing funds for sabbaticals, (4) increasing salaries for assistant professors, (5) increasing funds for faculty development, and (5) increasing funds for faculty research. Now, again, these are not specifics, but examples of things he might consider as priorities. The Committee agreed that this would be a good avenue to go. We could seek input from the University faculty at-large and then give direct input to the budgeting process. Even though the process has not been in existence for the 1999-2000 academic year, the Committee agreed to go ahead and begin the process this academic year. Based on the results, it is then recommended that a formal process be put in writing and brought before the Senate for the year 2000-2001 budgeting process.

Committee on Faculty Rights & Responsibilities: Senator Steinbach - No report.


Faculty Workload: Senator O'Connor reported on the Ad Hoc Committee for Faculty Workload. Since being formed last December, we have reviewed the EKU policy, we have collected data on benchmark institutions and the other regional institutions in Kentucky. We have discussed informally with chairs the feasibility and implications of adjustments in faculty teaching loads. We have discussed briefly, the impact of technology on the use of faculty time. We are now preparing an interim report that is being circulated among the Committee members.

Tuition Waiver: Senator Kilgore, who is the chair of Tuition Waiver Committee, was absent. We will expect a report in May.

College Credit for Work Experience: Senator Collins will be giving a report on College Credit for Work Experience in May.

Shared Faculty Positions: An ad hoc committee, the Shared Faculty Position Committee, has been created, but the committee members have yet to be established.


Senator Janssen reported from the Committee on Post-Tenure Review. Senator Janssen gave a brief overview of the history of the Post-Tenure Review Ad Hoc Committee.

Senator Janssen declared that she would make a motion but recommend that the Senate delay the approval of the Post-Tenure Review Policy until the May Faculty Senate meeting so that all faculty will have ample time to review this policy. She asked that faculty email any comments and/or suggestions to the Committee members. Committee members' names and web sites with similar policies in place will be made available on the Faculty Senate home page for faculty to review.

Senator Janssen moved approval of the Post-Tenure Review Policy. It was seconded. Chair Murray ruled that since it is a substantive motion, it would be voted on at the May Faculty Senate meeting.


Senator Marsden made a motion to approve the proposed change in admission criteria, which was approved by the Academic Council following several open hearings that resulted in modifications to the document. Motion seconded.

The following is representative of the extensive discussion on the motion.

Senator Janssen mentioned that high school students believe that they do not have to worry about their ACT's to come to Eastern and therefore if we set certain standards these students will be more concerned with their Act's

Senator Falkenberg expressed her concern that we should provide opportunities for all students, including minorities, and she believes the ACT test is biased.

Mr. Byrn commented that the new proposed Admissions Criteria addresses this concern. By taking the three-tiered approach to admission and providing students that fall below those standards, these students still have opportunities to be admitted to EKU. Mr. Byrn passed around a document which shows remedial programs, which are currently in place, that would accommodate those students who fall under these proposed admission criteria.

Mr. Aaron Thompson stated that under the existing proposal, there is a place for everyone to fit in. Even though students who fall below the minimal ACT criteria, they could actually apply to a special admissions process to one of these programs.

Dr. Marsden responded that the issues that Senator Falkenberg raised are important ones and the Committee really looked at these very carefully. These were brought up in at least two of the open forums. Specifically, it is true that certain groups do not respond, by evidence, to standardized tests. However, this institution is being held to a standard that is defined by the State of Kentucky. I think what is before you in this proposal is a very conscientious, responsible way of handling several groups who might be otherwise disenfranchised by a simple focus on ACT scores. A group we haven't talked about are students who have a hearing deficiency, are hard of hearing or sent from our Center for the Deaf. I think what is clearly being suggested to you today is that there are a number of programs on our campus which are going to be made available to those students who fall below the certain criteria as listed in 1, 2 or 3. The point is, of course, our resources are finite. Not everyone will be accommodated. This proposal is a responsible way of categorizing students who, by all standardized research, have deficiencies that can be addressed as quickly and efficiently as possible. This is a responsible document that a lot of people have thought through and provisions have been made for those special populations.

Senator Brown was asked to describe a program that she is involved with to help students succeed at EKU. Senator Brown is the program director for the Health Careers Opportunity Program. According to Senator Brown, this program is federally funded. The problem with the program is that they can only accept 30 students a year. We've been very successful for the last six years. We have a 78 percent retention rate over the six years. All of our students come from Appalachia Kentucky. Basically, it is a summer enrichment program with supplemental instruction.

A motion was made to postpone definitely until April 17, motion seconded. Motion passed.

Senator Janssen made a motion to suspend the rules to continue the meeting past its scheduled time. Motion seconded by Senator Collins. Motion passed.

Senator Murray called for nominations for Faculty Senate chair. Senator Janssen nominated Senator Phyllis Murray. Senator Virgin nominated Senator John Taylor. Senator Janssen nominated Senator John Flanagan. Motion was made to close nominations at three. Motion seconded. Motion passed.

Senator Murray asked for nominations for senate secretary. Senator Miller has served as parliamentarian and as secretary since January. According to our bylaws, nomination begins in April and election held in May and this person assumes responsibility in January. They do not have to be in the Senate. Motion was made to suspend the nominations for secretary until April 17. Senator McAdam seconded. Motion passed.

Senator Thompson made a motion that the proposal on hiring outside chairs requiring tenure status be postponed definitely until the April 17 meeting. Motion seconded and passed.


Gladys Johnson, the director of Cooperative Education came to address the Faculty Senate and give a brief overview of the Co-op program. Ms. Johnson passed around information on the co-op program.

EKU has one of the largest co-op programs in Kentucky. Ms. Johnson asked the faculty to encourage students to participate in the co-op program. Many employers now are saying that a degree is not enough and want students to have work experience as well as their degree. Approximately, 40-50% of co-op students are offered permanent employment with their employers. So they not only walk away from this institution with a degree, but also a position.

Since the 1991-1992 academic year, 8,241 students have participated in this program. The retention rate of students currently enrolled in the co-op program is 73 percent, and 10 percent were no longer attending EKU. Students who actually go out and get work experience that is directly related to their major and are able to apply that practice to the theory in the classroom, actually perform better and complete their degrees. Something else that we are really proud of is that students who participate in the Co-op Program have a GPA higher than the typical student. These students have an average GPA of 2.92 and the average GPA of students on campus according to university statistics is a 2.72. The minimum GPA to participate in the Co-op Program is 2.0.

The information that was distributed will show benefits for the student, the college, and the University. Also distributed was a table indicating salaries and a table that shows how many students participated in co-op for the Fall 1998-99 fiscal year.

Evaluations of the students from the employers was also distributed which indicates the strengths and weaknesses of our graduates.

Last year, we had 990 students that participated in co-op. I encourage you to encourage your students to get involved in the co-op program. I believe that this will help with our retention rate and help the students earn their degrees.

Course credit is awarded for co-op from those departments who require it. Usually, co-op is utilized as upper level free electives.

Senator Murray called for the next item on the agenda --Honorary Degrees and Commencement Speakers from Senator Marsden. Senator Flanagan postponed this item until the next meeting, April 17.

Senator Janssen made an announcement that faculty can report visits to schools using the WEB. This is extremely important and is a goal of the University that we visit as many schools as possible and find out which schools we are not visiting. Please report these visits this week on the WEB and encourage other people to do so as well.

Senator Murray announced that Council on Academic Affairs materials would be postponed until the next meeting, April 17.


click here for printable version of minutes

You will need to have the Adobe Acrobat Reader plug-in installed on your computer in order to view and print a hard copy of the minutes.

Open /*deleted href=#openmobile*/