D R A K E U N I V E R S I T Y Minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting January 30, 2002 The regular meeting of the 2001-2002 Faculty Senate was called to order at 3:30 p.m. by President Charles Phillips. The following senators were present for all or part of the meeting: Allen, Cairns, Clapham, DeLaet, Gillespie, Klugman, Lovell, McKnight, Parsa, Phillips, Pomeroy, Rankin, Reed, A. Sanders, B. Sanders, Simpson, Spencer, Symonds, Wright, David, Wright, Dean Absent: Hunter, Parsa Upon proper motion and vote the minutes of the December 2001 meeting were approved. Due to being delayed at another meeting, President Maxwell was not in attendance. Remarks from Provost Troyer The recent Board of Governors meeting was successful. There was approval for proceeding with the Olmsted renovation. The month of February will be busy with candidates for Arts & Sciences and Education Dean Candidates. Each search will bring four highly qualified candidates. Last year, the American Broadcasting Company news organization inquired about bringing their news cameras into Drake’s classrooms. The request was denied. The issue is complex and Provost Troyer will be putting together a group to address this question. There is a concern that current practice is not consistent across campus within academic units. Senators Phillips and Spencer had questions for the Provost. What was the reason for the ABC news request: the language program discontinuance issue? Second question: what is the purpose of the Olmsted renovation? It is to bring the building closer to being a true student union. Remarks from President Phillips Richard King will replace Deb DeLaet as an Arts & Sciences Senator for the remainder of the academic year. The Institutional Priorities & Review Committee (IPRC) members were announced. Faculty: Colin Cairns, Bruce Gilbert, Phil Houle, June Johnson, Mark Vitha, David Walker; Student Services- David Wright, SSEC- Theresa Grazanio; Administrative and student members are not yet known. The Senators received, as an informational hand out, the approved athletic schedules for the Women’s crew team for spring 2002 and Women’s soccer team for Fall 2002. The Senators also received as an informational hand out a selected portion of the Drake University tax return form 990. This salary listing is of the top five administrative officers and top five paid non-officers. The Faculty Senate at-large nomination ballot for 2002-2003 will go into campus mail later this week. Senators Spencer and Allen are working on a rewrite to the academic integrity motion. The motion rewritten language includes consultation with University’s counsel. The motion is expected on the agenda yet this year. Unfinished Business None presented New Business President Phillips opened up the discussion of Senate committee and subcommittee’s descriptions. He expressed interest in the group looking at the historic perspective of the committee structure and for general discussion. Senator Spencer indicated that the Arts & Sciences Council has had a discussion of representation within all divisions for its committees. The question needs to be asked of each committee whether divisional representation should be maintained (or established). When is it helpful to have such representation and when is it not necessary. Senator Spencer gave as an example of needing representation: the Promotion and Tenure committee. President Phillips announced that the present senate committee structure has 140 faculty positions. Senator Allen agreed with the idea that some committees do not need full representation. Benefits is an example of a committee that does not Senator Simpson expressed her experience has been that even if a committee has divisional representation, the work of the group is often more personal beliefs and working for the university. Senator R. D. Wright agreed that paring down the committees is a re-occuring task of Faculty Governance or any large body. It is a complex issue but a healthy exercise. He asserted that the Academic Freedom & Tenure (AF&T) committee should continue to have broad representation. There is a method within Arts & Sciences college for a person to ‘opt out’ from committee service if there is a workload issue. Senator Simpson asked if the All University Curriculum (AUC) and All University Tenure & Promotion (AUT&P) committees will be coming to the Senate soon as motions. These proposed committees would have some direct consideration on how some existing committees might be revised. Such as: whether Educational Policies & Issues (EPI) and Drake Curriculum (DC) could be merged and whether Budget & Business Affairs (B&BA) could be joined with the Benefits or whether B&BA would be topics handled within the Institutional Priorities and Review Committee (IPRC Susan Wright was recognized from the audience. She expressed that the Assessment Committee is a critical need at the time of reaccredidation, but is the group needed such that it should be fully staffed each year, was her question. Senator Gillespie asked which committees did the group feel required broad representation. She suggested the zero-based scheduling idea be used to review committees. That is, what if there was not a certain committee: where would the workload and issues go? Senator Gillespie continued with the question of membership on individual committees. For example: should AR&T have seven members and seven alternates. Several senators replied yes. President Phillips indicated that the Executive Committee (EC) did talk about bringing the AUC and AUT&P proposals to the Senate at this time. There was disagreement as to proceeding with discussing existing committees with two new descriptions on the agenda. With this discussion then the EC will have a better sense of the motion(s) to bring to the Senate agenda. Senators Allen and Simpson expressed that they do see the issue of committee restructuring to include the two proposed All University Committees. Senator Sanders agreed that the All University Committees need to be a part of this discussion but asked if some decisions could be made now. Such as whether the duties of B&BA can become part of the IPRC duties. The discussion of the All University Committees continued concerning whether a full draft of the proposed committees as motions existed and was there a timetable yet for presenting these creation motions. The answer was given that no timetable has been set and no drafts exist. Any All University Committee proposed would need to be approved by the Senate and go the Board of Governors. Senator Klugman, as a member of EC, that having a general knowledge of what persons were thinking in regards to committee restructuring would help keep the EC from going in circles. He indicated he would like to have committee that have something to do and can really do that task more than just being a rubber stamp of the faculty to what the administration has already done. President Phillips suggested that former chairs could be surveyed as to whether their committee was worth keeping. Senator RDean Wright noted that committees are often as active and prosperous as their chairs and members make them. Senator Allen cautioned that when a committee has not been effective, can we judge that by what they have gotten done. Perhaps the committee has not been proactive with the issues within their charge. One of the criteria should be whether the group is helpful to the University. Senator Spencer wondered which groups needed to be standing and which ones could be created as needs arise. He wondered if a process could exist to fill the ad hoc committees during the year for a specific need. Senator A Sanders reminded the Senate of the costs when we set out this process. Not simply the purpose, goals, but the effectiveness and costs of having a committee or not having the committee. In answer to a question, President Phillips reminded the Senate that today’s goal is to gather general input; such as, what general agreement is there to delete a certain committee, what general agreement is there regarding broad representation, and membership. Sue Wright reminded the assembly their purpose and goal is faculty governance. Oversight by faculty on issues and processes is important, however it is structured. The assembly began to comment on each committee as presented in a handout listing the existing standing senate committees and subcommittees. Executive Committee The comments were to retain this group with broad representation. Assessment: Sue Wright indicated that individual college/school assessments are carried out at the staff level in the unit. There may still be need for oversight but little ongoing activity at the university level. Senator A Sanders noted that the charge of IPRC includes assessment. President Phillips noted that IPRC has not yet met and perhaps caution should be used to assign that group more duties before they have assembled. Senator RDean Wright stated that as a present member of the Assessment Committee he knows the professional colleges do the process routinely. In Arts & Sciences, we needed to create a process. There was some desire to delete this standing committee. Senator Cairns expressed concern about dropping this committee and rolling its task into IPRC, when that group has not yet met. Motion to extend the meeting for 10 minutes passed. Academic Freedom & Tenure This committee was stated to essential as it is, including the broad based selection of members and alternates. This group would have no connection to the All University Tenure & Promotion committee. Educational Policies & Issues Senator Simpson questioned if EPI could be rolled into the All University Curriculum committee. Honorary Degree/Drake Medal There were comments to keep this committee as it deals with a specific charge and meets a specific timeline. University Budget & Business Affairs One suggestion was to merge this committee with Benefits as it had once been. University Benefits Committee Senator Allen hoped that this group would stay separate from IPRC. Intercollegiate Athletic Council This is an NCAA mandated committee. Perhaps the membership could be reviewed, but there was a desire to maintain a strong faculty presence. Admissions & Financial Aid Thomas Willoughby indicated that his committee has not met for the past three years. There has been time when its assistance has been helpful. Senator Allen hoped that this could be a proactive group, not just gate keeping. Senator Rankin wondered if it needed to have six faculty. Senator Lovell indicated that the Law faculty are very involved in admissions and hope that it would not be abandoned. Board of Student Communications Senator David Wright hoped that this committee would be kept with perhaps a variance in the membership. Senator Spencer agreed that this is one opportunity for students to work with an informed administrative group Senator McKnight agreed that faculty are important to this process. Human Subjects Research Review The comments were in favor of keeping this committee as it is now structured. Institutional Animal Care and Use The comments were in favor of keeping this committee as it is now structured. University Hearing Panel Senator Simpson stressed that the large number of faculty are helpful when a panel needs to be staffed. Jerry Price indicated that the number was eleven and now is set at nine. Senator Spencer suggested a more clear charge and description of duties. Senator Lovell said he has chaired this committee several times and reminded the group that the Student Conduct Code calls for five members are required for each panel, thus a wide pool of persons are needed to pull the actual panel members. Drake Curriculum Committee The comments were to defer any decision until the discussion of an All University Curriculum Committee. Information Resource Policies & Issues Senator Rankin said she saw a clear need for this group. Provost Troyer noted that 13 committees are currently working on technology issues across campus. There was a suggestion to consult with the Chief Information Officer, Paul Morris on this matter. Institutional Planning & Review committee No comments Board of Tellers No comments Senator Allen expressed an interest in the faculty having input or oversight with Marketing & Communications. The meeting adjourned at 5:05 p.m. Submitted by Secretary, Nancy Geiger