ACADEMIC SENATE
MINUTES
Wednesday, March 24,
2004
(Approved)
Call to Order
Chairperson Lane Crothers called the meeting
to order at 7:00 p.m.
Roll Call
Senator Borg called the roll and declared a
quorum.
Approval of Minutes of March 3,
2004
Motion XXXV-75: By Senator
Koutsky, seconded by Senator Fryman, to approve the Academic Senate minutes of
March 3, 2004. The minutes were unanimously approved.
Chairperson's Remarks:
Senator Crothers: As you may know, a dedicated
faculty member and Senate representative, Barbara Kurtz, Chairperson of the
Foreign Languages Department, passed away recently. We extend our condolences
to her family and friends. At the last meeting, we failed to say thank you to
former SGA President Ryan Meister; that was his last Senate meeting. We now
have a new SGA President, but in retrospect, we do want to express our
appreciation to Ryan for his hard work as the President of SGA and President of
the Student Body. I know that there are a number of newly elected student
senators in the audience. New student senators will be seated on May 5 along
with the entire new Senate. You are more than welcome to attend and observe
Senate meetings before you are officially seated. The Academic Affairs
Committee is working hard to bring the report on the review of the General
Education Program to the Senate this semester. We are going to be busy for the
rest of the semester. I appreciate your
hard work.
Legislative
Agenda
Senator Crothers: We are fortunate that
Representative Dan Brady has accepted an invitation to address the Senate about
what is going on in the state legislature and then answer questions that you
might have. I believe that this is the first time a state representative has
come to the Senate and interacted with us in this way. Representative Brady
serves on the Higher Education Appropriations Committee and the Higher
Education Committee.
Representative Dan Brady:
I would first like to
talk about budget matters that affect higher education in the state. The latest
that has come out of Springfield is the Governor’s Capital Budget, which came
out yesterday. The earlier budget from the Governor, which dealt with the university
General Revenue Fund, called for a 2% reduction in funding for all public
universities in Illinois. Though we are disappointed that the Governor made
this reduction, we do want to hold the line at what has been proposed in his
budget. We don’t want the budget administration to come back to us at a later
date with an even greater reduction. The Capital Budget for ISU contains a
recommendation for $1.5 million for the planning stage of the power plant and
other facility projects. What is bothersome about the proposed Capital Budget
is that there is a bill for bond construction not only for higher education,
but also for secondary and elementary education that would, in effect, put the
money at the Governor’s discretion. This would essentially bypass initial
recommendations by the IBHE and the State Board of Higher Education, which is
the established protocol for how a university gets money for capital projects.
This could be very harmful to the overall process and we want to guard against
that.
There are several legislative
proposals in the works pertaining to higher ed. House Bill 4073 from
Representative Monique Davis proposes a commission for the establishment of the
criteria for tenure and for the approval of tenure appointments. We, on the Higher
Education Committee, felt that this bill was very volatile in many respects. We
were able to work with Representative Davis and asked her to go back to the
drawing board on this one. This bill is currently in the Rules Committee and
many of you should be very concerned about it.
House Bill 4361 deals with a Fire
Sprinkler Dormitories Act. House Bill 4510 restricts members of boards of
review, such as Boards of Trustees and governing boards within state
universities, from holding public office appointments. House Bill 4686 requires
state universities and community colleges to provide options to military
student in active service. Along those lines, House Bill 3887, which I proposed
and which passed in the House today, is a bill that deals with in-state tuition
for military personnel in active duty and their dependents. Also passed today
was House Bill 7029, which provides nursing school grants. House Bill 4877
provides extended sick leave of up to two years for SURS participants credited
towards their retirement.
Senator Reid: What is the general attitude that
you see in Springfield toward public higher education? We have lost much of our
state funding in the past three years. Is the attitude that they are paring off
the fat or do they see that we are really hurting and that as times get better
we are going need funds to make up for what has been lost?
Representative Dan Brady: I can’t speak to the general
attitude of all of my colleagues. President Bowman has stated that
approximately $16.8 million in general revenues were lost by ISU in the past
several years. This administration feels that there is more to trim in higher
education. We are trying to convince them otherwise through the information
gathered through our conversations with universities across the state. The
direction of this administration, in my opinion, is that many things about
higher education have been a learning experience. We were able to convince the
Governor that returning the income fund to Springfield was a bad idea. Those of
us on the Commission on Higher Education are trying to absorb what we can and
protect what is vital.
Senator Reid: If the economy starts to turn
around, is the attitude that we didn’t really need the money that was deducted
or will the administration help us more at that time?
Representative Brady: We continually remind those in the
state administration what the cuts are doing. The public university
administrator meetings with legislators in Springfield are quite convincing. We
continue to try to educate the Governor and his staff on the importance of
higher education and that we can’t continue this pattern of reductions. We have
emphasized that we are going to have to have funding when that funding becomes
available for the university to thrive.
Senator Jerich: Did House Bill 4877 concerning
SURS pass?
Representative Brady: It has not passed at this time,
but is still in committee.
Senator Jerich: I serve on the IBHE Faculty
Advisory Council as ISU’s representative. What is the sense in Springfield of
the specifics of this term “fat” that has to be cut that we continually hear
about? On what criteria is this term based?
Representative Brady: The administration still
perceives that there are areas that can be cut, not only areas in public
education. I am not the Budget Director for the Governor, so I can’t tell you
when they think enough is enough. The Governor has made it clear that there
will be no new income tax or sales tax increases. Short of some source of new
revenue, they plan to do it with additional fees.
Senator Jerich: Is there any sense that some of
this may be coming from the type of interaction that they have had with the
administration of the University of Illinois in Urbana/Champaign?
Representative Brady: What occurred in that situation
obviously has not helped. I can’t speak for the Governor, but that situation
did give a black eye to our university system. But the issue is really getting
the decision makers to understand the effects of the cuts.
Senator Borg: Thank you for being here tonight
to address the Senate. I am sensitive to the budgetary problems, but what is
the value of higher education in the opinion of the state administration and
what is the legislative perspective on what public education contributes to the
State of Illinois and to society in general?
Representative Brady: Higher education is obviously
invaluable. It prepares students to enter the workforce in a chosen profession.
The key is reminding the administration of what higher education can do for the
workforce, because a lot of their focus seems to be on jobs. We can’t improve
the workforce without higher education and the assistance that it gives. I
can’t articulate how valuable higher education is to the State as a whole. We
have to remind the administration of its value, not only to the economy, not
only to the community, but also to the production of an educated workforce.
Senator Borg: I am concerned that it seems as if
the perception is that higher education is merely a training ground for the
workplace. All of us who have an education here have received something beyond
mere training. Is there an understanding that higher education offers something
beyond training?
Representative Brady: Higher education is the key to
the future of our state in many different aspects. Those individuals that are
on the committees know the importance of the universities, not only from the
standpoint of what they do for the students, community, faculty and staff, but
what it will do for the future.
Senator Wang: Representative Brady, thank you
for coming. Is there a possibility of expanding the revenue bases?
Representative Brady: The Governor has said no to any
type of tax increase. He has proposed over $300 million in new fees on
businesses and the administration has talked about many one-time initiatives.
Many of those proposals have not borne fruit, as with the sale of buildings and
the casino license. We are $1.7 billion in the hole in the State of Illinois.
That is the budget under which we are presently operating. We are working on
the 2005 budget and in our revenue pictures, it appears its going to be even
worse without the influx of significant new revenue and the cuts to higher ed
and all across the board will continue. Short of the economy turning around,
there is no immediate solution in the foreseeable future.
Senator Wang: What are the chances of the
Governor reconsidering his position on taxes?
Representative Brady: Probably coming to a meeting like
this tonight. The fact that over 80% of school districts in elementary and
secondary education are in deficit spending is exerting extreme pressure in the
legislature. President Jones in the Senate has now opened up to the idea of
listening to a discussion on income tax increases. We have to deliver a clear
message to the-powers-that-be that we cannot operate in this mode. We cannot
balance the budget on the backs of businesses with increased fees.
Senator DeSantis: What is the driving force behind
the bill by Representative Monique Davis and the direction that you think that
it is heading?
Representative Brady: It concerns a tenure case that
was dealt with improperly. That is what precipitated the legislation, but I
believe that the legislation is dead for the foreseeable future.
Senator Holland: What are the feelings about our
own revenue enhancements, such as increased tuition?
Representative Brady: The Truth-in-Tuition Act did
pass, which entails a fixed tuition rate for a student for four years. However,
that act did not prevent universities from raising fees for incoming freshmen
to make ends meet. There is nothing in Springfield right now to stop this.
Senator Pereira: Do you feel that higher
education is undervalued by the State?
Representative Brady: All that can be done is to guard
priorities that the university presidents and the individuals in your financial
areas educate us on and to pass this education on to the Governor’s office. An
example of that is that tomorrow, the presidents or representatives of the
universities are coming to my boss’ office and we are going to put together a
plan for the Governor mapping out priorities that we are not willing to give
up. That will be for the real budgetary negotiations in May.
Senator Fryman: President Bowman, last year,
there was an ISU campus-wide vote for a new recreation center on campus. I know
with the current situation that it is not one of the top priorities. I know
right now we are having a hard time keeping the library open, but how long will
it be before the rec project takes off.
President Bowman: That project is certainly one
that is important to the institution and is ranked high on our capital priority
list. Given the budget problems in Springfield, however, I don’t see it getting
funding in the near term, primarily because the Governor’s focus is on
classroom and health and safety projects. The recreation center project may
move forward when the economy turns around.
Representative Brady: There are over 30 capital
projects on the priorities list for the state universities. The
recreation/quality of life items are simply not on the administration’s radar
screen as far as state funding goes.
Senator Adams: I believe that the rec center
was also going to include some academic space.
President Bowman: That is certainly being made
known in Springfield, but it still has an aura of a big gym.
Senator Adams: I would like for Representative
Brady to come over to Horton Field House and see the academic space we have
available there.
Representative Brady: I would be glad to accept that
invitation. That is the type of education, seeing first hand, that truly helps.
Senator Crothers: Thank you Representative Brady
for speaking with the Senate this evening. I want to thank President Bowman for
facilitating your presence here. Hopefully, in the future, we will have an
opportunity to do something like this again.
Representative Brady: I look forward to it and would be
happy to come back. Thank you for your time. Also, congratulations to Josh
Rinker as the new Student Body President and to Zach Koutsky as the new Student
Trustee.
Student Government Association
President/Student Body President’s Remarks:
Senator Rinker: I would first like to emphasize the excellent
job that Ryan Meister did as the Student Body President. I hope to step into
those shoes and fulfill my campaign promises. I hope we can raise the bar in
terms of getting the voices of the students heard. For the remainder of the
school year, our focus will be to train the new student senators. I would also
like to extend my congratulations to the current senators because you have all
done a fantastic job of representing your constituents.
President’s Remarks:
President Bowman: The applicant pool for fall 04 includes 10,658 freshmen with an average ACT of 24.6; 51.6% are in the top quarter of their graduating class and 18.9% are in the top 10%. I would like to recognize Senator McGinnis and publicly thank him for his efforts in Washington. Congressman Johnson was on campus announcing funding for an obesity project and Gary worked very hard on obtaining that funding. We are also discussing another large project with Congressman Johnson. Dr. McGinnis and his staff have been working with Congressman Weller on several projects that are very important to the campus, the wind energy project at the farm and a thermal destruction system that we think may receive funding through the Homeland Security Fund. An Accreditation Team, which visited our campus to look at the construction management program, had nothing but rave reviews about that program. We are closing in on $80 million in our Capital Campaign and we have some very large asks on the table. I have no doubt that we will reach our goal of $88 million.
Senator Crothers: Will there be any impact of the University of Illinois’ substantial expansion of freshman enrollment?
President Bowman: It could have an impact on our show rate and what our class profile looks like, so we are watching that very closely. If we stay true to our strategic plan, we can further distinguish ourselves from the freshman experience at the U of I because the only way that they can significantly expand freshman enrollment is simply to put more students in larger lecture halls.
Provost’s Remarks:
Provost Presley: The University Review Committee is looking at
an advanced draft of the five-year review appeal process for post-tenure
review. The URC has also taken under consideration the recommendations for
revisions to the ASPT process that I submitted immediately after the promotions
and tenure applications cleared my office. I sent the URC suggestions
concerning confidentiality issues and the definition of a minority report. I am
told that they received those and have made few revisions. The offers for
presidential and minority scholarships are out. 49 presidential scholarships
offers for $8,000 annually and 29 minority scholarships offers for $5,000
annually are out. More than 200 students applied for each scholarship. The
Office of Admissions worked in collaboration with the Honors Program this year
to increase recruitment and follow up activities and they implemented a daylong
on-campus scholarship interview competition. Two of the four dean candidates
for the College of Fine Arts have been interviewed on campus. The third
candidate will be on campus tomorrow. I hope that you are able to attend the
open forums. We will have one more CFA dean candidate on campus. We have a
rough draft of the schedule for on-campus interviews and open forums for the five
candidates for the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences. Information about
that will be coming out.
Senator Reid: There was some
talk about revisiting the whole format and criteria for post-tenure review,
particularly if we should do this for everyone or only for problem cases. Is
that issue being brought up anywhere?
Provost Presley: There are plans
to bring it up, but at this point, the URC is dealing with the appeal process
first.
Senator Crothers: We had a
discussion at a previous caucus that we wanted to do an audit of the ongoing
practices and then work from that.
Vice President of Student Affairs’ Remarks:
Excused Absence
Vice President of Finance and Planning’s
Remarks:
Senator Bragg: This is the beginning of the “budget season”.
Many of us will be involved in meetings in the upcoming months in Springfield.
April 28 and 29 are the dates for the appropriation hearings for ISU.
Representative Brady referred to a plan for funding for the utility
distribution system and auxiliary power plant. That was recommended by the
IBHE, but the Governor did not support that. Instead, we are getting about $1.5
million for various capital renewal projects.
Committee Reports:
Academic Affairs Committee
Senator Armstrong: We are constructing
the final report on the review of General Education. Presently, we have
information posted on the Senate web site and have solicited input from faculty
and academic professionals. There will be an open forum tomorrow to discuss Gen
Ed in Schroeder Hall 138 from 5:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m.
Administrative Affairs and Budget Committee
Senator O’Donnell: The committee discussed the Administrator Selection Policy on which we reached agreement. We were charged to discuss a freedom of speech issue raised by MASH (Mobilizing Activists and Students for Hemp) concerning the denial of permission to post flyers within the dormitories for their Hemp Fest. The reason given for the denial was that the promotion included the word “hemp” and a picture of a marijuana leaf, which were in violation of the overarching Alcohol Policy. Two of our students have been in touch with members of MASH to inform them that there is a new University Alcohol Policy and that they should resubmit their poster for approval. One of our committee members is reviewing the Amplification Policy, specifically as it applies to a few campus events. She will be using the policy as a gauge for measuring the validity of the policy as it now stands. The work on that policy is ongoing.
Faculty Affairs Committee
Senator Wylie: The
committee again discussed the ombudsperson position. We may have something
concrete soon. The new Assistant Vice President of Human Resources, Dr.
Schoenwald, has a background and expertise in the ombudsperson program and we
will solicit feedback from him. The committee continues its discussion of
faculty recruitment and retention and has accumulated a number of documents on
this issue. We found that in some colleges, summer teaching opportunities are
given to senior faculty. We believe that offering junior faculty these
opportunities might be used as a recruiting and retention tool. Other
suggestions included faculty mentoring programs in every college, stipends to
faculty who are doing research with students as research assistants and, of
course, an onsite daycare facility.
Senator Borg: One of
the special emphasis areas of the NCA Accreditation Team has to do with faculty
notions of distinctiveness and excellence. I would encourage the Faculty Affairs
Committee to meet with the subcommittee dealing with that particular area.
Senator Crothers: They
will be coming to the Faculty Caucus at the first meeting in May.
Senator Wang: How
would giving more responsibility to junior faculty increase retention?
Senator Wylie: Some
teaching opportunities, such as teaching during the summer, are not open to
junior faculty. The incentive would be the additional income earned.
Planning and Finance Committee
Senator
Crothers: The committee continued its discussion with Senator Bragg about
financing alternatives for the University and also has an item in the
Information section of the agenda.
Rules Committee
Senator Coliz: The Rules Committee has several items on the agenda this evening. We voted in approval on the revisions to the Academic Planning Committee functions, the request to require student members of the Honors Council to be enrolled in the Honors Program and the addition of one faculty and one student member to the Student Code Enforcement and Review Board. We approved moving the appointment time of Council for Teacher Education representatives without actually changing the terms of service on the Council. We agreed to hold the election for the Senate CTE representative at the first Senate meeting in the fall of each year rather than in April, as is traditionally done. After a great deal of discussion, we rejected the decisions regarding the disbandment/reorganization of several Senate external committees (Student Center Programming Board, Student Center Policy Board, Entertainment Committee and University Forum Committee) and have sent a request to the Executive Committee to engage in a discussion on shared governance with the appropriate administrator and to bring the issue back to the Senate when that discussion is complete.
Action Items:
03.18.04.01 Academic Planning Committee Structure –
Revised - Senate Information Item 1/21/04 (Rules Committee)
Motion XXXV-76: By Senator Coliz to approve the revised membership of the Academic Planning Committee. This would be a revision to the Blue Book. The proposed membership is as follows:
Provost or Designee (Voting)
Director, University Planning (Voting)
Associate Vice President for Graduate Studies, Research, and International Studies (Voting)
Chairperson of the Academic Senate (Voting)
One member of the Planning and Finance Committee of the Senate to be selected annually by the Chair of the Planning and Finance Committee (Voting)
One member of the Academic Affairs Committee of the Senate to be selected annually by the Chair of the Academic Affairs Committee (Voting)
Three senators with faculty status elected by the Senate for one-year terms; each of these three senators must be a member of a different college (Voting)
One graduate student selected by the Graduate Student Association (Voting)
One undergraduate student selected by the Student Government Association (Voting)
An administrative assistant from the Office of the Provost (Non-Voting)
Associate Vice President for Undergraduate Studies
Student Trustee on ISU Board of Trustees
Immediate Past Chairperson of the Academic
Senate
Chairperson of the Academic Affairs Committee
Immediate Past Chairperson of the Academic
Affairs Committee
Friendly Amendment: By Senator Fazel that the
Faculty Caucus elect the faculty members of the Academic Planning Committee as
the student members are elected by the SGA and the Graduate Student
Association.
Senator Coliz: Typically that is the way
it is worded in the Blue Book. I think that nominations typically go to the
Faculty Caucus first and then on to the Senate.
Senator Crothers: It is a strange mix.
Right now, the Academic Senate still elects most of the students. There are
some committees in which the elections are not held in that way, but it is
still the case that the Academic Senate, as a whole, elects students;
therefore, this language is consistent with that.
Senator Coliz did not accept the
Friendly Amendment.
Motion XXXV-77: By Senator Fazel, seconded
by Senator Armstrong, to require the faculty members of the Academic Planning
Committee to be elected by the Faculty Caucus rather than by the full Senate.
Senator Coliz: The primary reason that I
am opposed to this motion is not that I object to the faculty members of the
Senate electing the faculty representatives of the committee, but that the
language, as it is here, is consistent with the rest of the Blue Book. If we
are going to change the policy for electing people to this type of committee, then
we need to make those changes globally in the Blue Book.
Call the Question: By Senator Armstrong. There were
no objections to calling the question.
By voice vote, the amendment was not approved by a majority of the Senate. Two senators abstained.
By voice vote, the Academic Planning membership, as revised by the Rules Committee, was unanimously approved.
03.04.04.01 Administrator
Selection (Search Committee) Policy – Revised - Senate Information Item 2/18/04
(Administrative Affairs and Budget Committee)
Senator O’Donnell: At Senator Burk’s suggestion, the committee changed the procedure for selecting civil service and administrative/professional representatives for the Vice President for Finance and Planning and for the Vice President for University Advancement so that that they are in accord with the methods of the other two vice-presidential search committees. Civil service and A/P will do the choosing of the civil service and A/P search committee members. A question arose at the last meeting about the requirement for A/P representation if there were no A/P staff within a unit. Therefore, we clarified that issue by adding the phrase, “when applicable”. On page 7, 2a, under Vice President for University Advancement, we propose that the following sentence be substituted for what is there now: “Two faculty members will be elected by the faculty members of the Academic Senate”. On page 5, under Vice President for Finance and Planning, we propose the following sentence be substituted for what is currently there: “One faculty member will be elected by the faculty members of the Academic Senate.” The committee considered the chair’s question about structurally adding a department chair to the search committee for deans, page 9, 3a. The committee agreed that no change was necessary in the policy text because, in essence, if a department chair is faculty, he/she may serve on the search committee. Therefore, we felt that the language was sufficient.
Motion XXXV-78: By Senator O’Donnell to approve the Administrator Selection Committee Policy.
Senator Fazel: On page 1, 2a, it indicates that three faculty members will be elected by the Academic Senate. I would suggest that the Faculty Caucus elect the faculty members.
Senator O’Donnell: Since this is for the selection of faculty members on the Search Committee for the Vice President of Student Affairs, the committee felt that it might be more appropriate to leave that as an election that was conducted by the full Senate.
Senator Borg: Why then is that inconsistent with the four students appointed by the Student Government Association?
Friendly Amendment: By Senator Fazel that the Faculty Caucus elect the faculty members of the Administrator Search Committee for the Vice President of Student Affairs. Senator O’Donnell accepted the Friendly Amendment.
Senator Coliz: You have changed the policy so that the faculty elected are elected to represent the interests of the faculty rather than the interests of the whole campus.
Senator Crothers: There are mechanisms within the policy for selecting students, A/P and civil service representatives, so there is no disenfranchisement.
Provost Presley: The language throughout requires the Provost to provide lists of eligible faculty for elections, such as on page 10 in section 10d. The Provost is only the middle person in this transaction and requiring the Provost to provide this list makes for delay and conspiratorial speculation. Additionally, my office has no capacity for creating such a list. I would suggest that the Assistant Vice President for Human Resources provide these lists.
Friendly Amendment: By Provost Presley that the Assistant Vice President of Human Resources provide the list of eligible faculty. The friendly amendment was accepted by Senator O’Donnell.
Provost Presley: The committee should strike out “Associate Vice President of Undergraduate Studies” as the position no longer exists.
Senator Crothers: Would Steve Adams of Enrollment Management serve in the same capacity?
Provost Presley: Steve has no curricular responsibilities.
Senator Crothers: But the policy has either/or circumstances: either administers who report directly to the Provost or administrators who have curricular responsibilities. Steve does report to your office.
Provost Presley: I don’t know if the
original framers of the policy would want someone in that slot who has no
curricular responsibilities. On page 15, the policy indicates that the
President will name a temporary appointment to fill a vacancy and, before acting,
shall consult with the Provost and members of the search committee. That might
mean that the search would have to fail before an interim could be appointed
and that, at the least, the search committee would have to be elected before an
interim could be appointed. That could mean a very long delay. I would ask that
the committee consider inserting language that is parallel with page 9, item
number 2, instead so that an interim appointment could be done in a more
immediate way after the proper consultation.
Senator O’Donnell: The committee may take another look at this to make it consistent throughout before we ask the Senate to vote on its approval.
Provost Presley: On page 16, 4a, the requirement that one of the candidates of the search not be a current faculty member makes an internal search illegal or impossible. Sometimes, we would prefer to do an internal search first.
Senator Fazel: You said that department chairpersons are eligible to serve on the dean search committees.
Senator O’Donnell: Chairpersons are considered faculty, so they would be eligible.
Senator Fazel: But on page 10, item d, and on page 11, item i, it reads that only faculty who do not hold administrative positions are eligible. Does that not include chairpersons? On page 13, item 5, there is a requirement for representation by all constituencies. Are these members of the department? I would not require this representation, but ask the college councils to encourage it.
Senator O’Donnell: We’ll look at that. We would like to withdraw the policy as an Action Item until the committee has reviewed it further.
Information Items:
02.05.04.01 Program Approval Proposal (Planning and Finance Committee)
Senator Crothers: The subcommittee of the Planning and Finance Committee lead by Senator Plantholt created a process to ensure that department and curriculum committees carefully considered the financial implications of new program proposals.
Senator Plantholt: The committee wanted to make sure that there were realistic projections of what kind of financial implications there were for these proposals. After a discussion with Jan Shane, Betty Chapman and Joe Trefzger, Chairperson of the University Curriculum Committee, we agreed that the financial analysis should happen sooner rather than later in the process. This proposal provides a procedure to ensure that the anticipated funding needs are looked at closely before the proposal reaches the College Curriculum Committees.
Dr. Jan Shane, Associate Provost: This is the information that the IBHE would require. We are not adding a new process. We are just doing this earlier so that the faculty and the chair working on new programs very early on start a resource discussion. It provides assurances that resources have been discussed and that there is a sense of support for the program.
Motion XXXV-79: By Senator Plantholt, seconded by Senator Wang, that the Program Approval Proposal be moved to action.
Senator Crothers: This has been discussed with deans and chairs, so they have been advised.
Senator Fowles: Was there any concern by deans and chairs about getting these numbers?
Senator Crothers: I can only speak about the Provost Advisory Committee, which had little objection to the proposal.
Dr. Shane: The deans and chairs have to get the numbers in anyway before it can go to the board. It just pushes it earlier in the process.
Motion XXXV-80: By Senator Plantholt that the Program Approval Proposal be incorporated into the curriculum approval process for new courses and programs. The motion was unanimously approved.
11.16.01.12 Solicitation Policy – Policy on Review
Cycle (Administrative Affairs and Budget Committee)
Senator O’Donnell: The committee reviewed the current Solicitation Policy and recommended no revisions to the existing regulations, as we saw no controversial issues.
Provost Presley: Could we time the approval of this policy so that the first paragraph could make reference to the Mass E-Email Policy once that policy passes through this body?
Senator Coliz: The Mass E-Mail Policy is now before the Rules Committee. There is certainly no problem with the Executive Committee directing the Rules Committee, in addition to approving that policy, to approve wording changes to this document, which could be brought forward at the same time. You could approve this document now as it is and when the Mass E-Mail Policy comes forward, language changes to the Solicitation Policy would go into effect.
Senator Crothers: You could offer that codicil when this comes up as an Action Item.
Senator Attivissimo: The policy does not speak to the Student Foundation Board.
Senator Crothers: That was not included because this policy was created before the Student Foundation Board was created.
Senator Attivissimo: I think you should insert a reference to the Student Foundation Board, as it does now exist.
03.15.04.01A Code of Ethics Revisions (Rules Committee)
Senator Coliz: The University was charged with disseminating the Code of Ethics widely and quickly because of the addition of the consensual relations section. The question was could the Rules Committee revise the entire Code in a speedy manner. We felt that that was not appropriate. To significantly revise the Ethics Code would require going to the campus community for recommendations and would entail at least a yearlong effort. The current Code is poorly laid out, so in the interest of getting something more presentable out, we reworded, reorganized and updated non-controversial items involving changes in structure and concept. Next year’s Rules Committee can be charged with revision of content.
One of the committee’s recommendations was to remove the ethical expectations of administrators and place them in a separate document. The ethics document has two components, goals which ethical faculty try to achieve and rules with sanctions. The revised Code now separates those two components. We think this document is a worthwhile interim step.
Senator Reid: The committee made language changes without providing the original language. We can’t make a decision without strikeouts of the original wording along side underlined revised wording. This is an incredibly sensitive document that affects grievances.
Senator Crothers: A compendium document could line up the existing language with the revised language. However, the reorganization was too broad for a strikeout format.
Provost Presley: The memo attached to the Code, page 1, number 4, contains language about a collective bargaining process for non-tenure track faculty that does not exist. The Code of Ethics for Administrators, page 7, item c, says that anonymous statements concerning the quality of people’s work, their moral or professional character or any other attributes should be given no credence. That would mean that the questionnaires that we use to assess performances and in open forums will have no credence because they are usually anonymous.
Senator Coliz: That is the original language in the Code.
Senator Jerich: This document needs further refinement. I will offer a list of suggested changes for your consideration.
Senator Fazel: The Administrator Code of Ethics and the Faculty Code of Ethics were mixed before. A lot of the issues that are relevant to faculty are also relevant to administrators, but they are not included in the new Code of Ethics for administrators.
Senator Crothers: If we don’t approve it now, it may be sometime before we have a revised Code of Ethics. The Rules Committee for 2004-2005 has been formally charged with the revision of the Code.
Senator Reid: What was the logic of separating the Code of Ethics from the Academic Freedom Ethics and Grievance Policy? It used to be attached to that policy.
Senator Coliz: People needed to be able to find it separately and refer to the document without having to go to the end of the AFEG document to find it.
Senator Reid: In the past, the Code was always published as a separate document.
Senator Crothers: I could not find it in the Policies and Procedures Manual on the web. The current AFEG Policy does reference the Code.
Senator Coliz: We did this in the spirit of trying to incrementally improve things. If the spirit of the Senate is that this is not an incremental improvement, we are happy to withdraw it.
Senator Crothers: I will leave that up to your committee. I don’t think that the spirit of the Senate has fully come out. Four or five people have some serious reservations; they may be representing the rest of the people who are not raising their voices, though they may not be.
Senator Reid: I believe that this is worth doing. I just need to know what you have done.
Senator Holland: I think we may want to withdraw this and leave it for next year, given the time we have remaining.
Communications:
02.24.04.02 Service Awards –
Call for Nominations
02.24.04.03
Minority Recognition Awards – Call for
Nominations
Underrepresented
Groups Report – Web Link to Online Report: http://www.diversity.ilstu.edu
Program Approval:
02.27.04.03 Post-Baccalaureate Graduate Certificate for
Alternative Route to Secondary Teacher Education Certification - Approved by
the Senate on the Consent Agenda March 19, 2004
Theatre Production
Senator Borg: Senator Hampton is not here tonight, nor will she will be at the next Senate meeting. She is now on her third night this week of 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. rehearsals for the opera production, the Marriage of Figaro. I also will not be at the next Senate meeting because I am involved in the musical aspect of the opera. It opens two weeks from tonight at 7:30 p.m.; I hope that you can all attend.