D R A K E U N I V E R S I T Y
Minutes of the Faculty Senate meeting

December 11, 2002
The regular meeting of the 2002-2003 Faculty Senate was called to order at 3:30 p.m. by President Art Sanders.
The following senators were present for all or part of the meeting: Cairns, Dougherty, Esposito, Gillespie, Goldford, Hunter, Lovell, McKnight, Reincke, Sanders, A, Sanders, B, Schaefer, Schulman, Soltis, Vita, Wade, and Wright.
Absent: Klugman, Parsa, Reed, Simpson

November 2002 minutes were accepted as presented.

Report of President Maxwell

• The Diversity Audit Team report is due to be received and distributed at the beginning of the spring semester. The Institutional Priorities & Review Committee (IPRC) has been looking at the recommendations of the Task Force.
• The Fiscal Year 04 budget assumptions are being discussed currently by the Senior Advisory Council (SAC). These assumptions include the establishment of the tuition rates and room & board rates. There have been several discussions reviewing the salary benchmark studies for both the faculty and staff. A special Senate meeting, in executive session, in January may be held to share the FY04 figures before the Board of Trustee meeting in late January.
• The enrollment numbers this past year were driven by the Pharmacy School enrollment and the University will be capping Pharmacy enrollment. While interest in that program is a positive for the whole institution, there is a real capacity of quality facility and experiential experiences which must be considered. There has been an increase of campus visits of potential undergraduates already this semester and the FastAps contracted service is online to accept an admission application. This procedure enhancement is credited with bringing an increase in applications.
• President Maxwell thanked Art Sanders and Nancy Reincke for arranging and hosting the faculty gathering next week.
  Senator Russ Lovell made an announcement that April 12, 2003 will be a Constitutional Law Symposium centered on various diversity issues.

Senator Goldford asked if our admission practices are expected to be affected by the Michigan affirmative action case which is going to the Supreme Court. President Maxwell indicated he did not believe it will be an issue for Drake, as the overall enrollment has not been capped.
President Sanders expressed concerns about recent campus construction impacting the academic environment poorly. Senators Goldford and McKnight echoed the concern citing specific experiences at Meredith Hall. President Maxwell indicated that the process has not gone well and there is an effort currently being made to improve the communication and understanding of construction in a higher education environment.

Report from Provost Troyer

• Provost Troyer stressed that during budget process sessions; the first priority has been and will remain faculty and staff compensation. Other needs will come second throughout the institution. There have been productive discussions within the Deans Council concerning methods to bring into Drake new revenues.
• Sixteen sabbaticals for next year will be recommended to the Board of Trustees for their approval in January 2003.
• Dean searches are progressing on schedule and there are expected to be Law School and Business College candidates visiting campus early in the Spring semester.

Report from President Sanders

• A special meeting of the Faculty Senate in executive session will be held in January 2003 with only one agenda item, the Fiscal Year 04 proposed university budget. The meeting will be Wednesday, Jan 15th; 3:30 p.m., location is yet to be determined. The Senate will receive information for upper central administration and asked to provide feedback.
• The Board of Trustees meeting in January will include a Friday evening social gathering, January 24th. There will be an invitation memo to the Faculty sent soon asking for dinner hosts. The expenses for the meal would be paid by the President's Office. These faculty volunteers need to be identified by late next week.
• December 12th in the afternoon will be the faculty gathering in Levitt Hall, Old Main. This session is meant to be a beginning of a process of communication amongst faculty.

Karl Schaefer, Chair of the University Curriculum Committee (UCC), distributed a document titled Proposed Cross-listing Procedures. This item was addressed by the UCC at the request of the Registration Services Committee, chaired by Jim Reynolds. Senator Schaefer highlighted the main features of the Cross-listing Procedures. The handout also included an item titled: Policy Regarding courses Proposed for the Drake Curriculum. This second policy was approved by the UCC November 2002.

Unfinished Business: None presented

New Business:
Senator Wade moved and Gillespie seconded motion 03.03

To approve the creation of a Faculty Sick Leave Policy

During their regular appointment period (nine-month academic year or ten, eleven or twelve-month appointment as identified by letter of appointment), full-time faculty members who experience absences due to injury or illness (illness includes any disability or absence due to pregnancy, including prenatal and/or delivery and recovery there from identified as necessary by a healthcare provider) will as a minimum benefit have their salary continued by the University according to the following schedule:

First year of service:
Full pay for up to 6 weeks followed by 60% pay up to the 90 calendar day elimination period under the university long term disability policy.

Second year of service and over:
Full pay for up to 6 weeks plus an additional 10 days of paid leave for each year of completed service, not to exceed the 90 calendar day elimination period under the university long term disability policy. Any time period not covered by full pay will be paid at 60% pay up to the 90-calendar day elimination period.

If the absence is due to a serious health condition that qualifies for job protected/unpaid leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), faculty members who accrue vacation will be required to utilize accrued vacation at the conclusion of full pay under this policy and as identified in the Drake University Family and Medical Leave Policy and the University Long Term Disability Policy.

In addition, for any sick leave that can be "pre-planned" (i.e. non-emergency surgeries, recovery from childbirth, scheduled treatments causing episodic leave requirements, etc), or in the case of parental/bonding leave which is not otherwise covered by this policy, deans/chairpersons are encouraged to work with the faculty member to develop a flexible leave plan that will accommodate the faculty member's need for leave but will still ensure continuity of classroom offerings for students.

This may include, but is not limited to, a one-course release for a semester with the course to be "made up" during a summer session, teaching a web course or courses from a remote location and/or assignment to non-teaching duties. Alternative schedules must comply with any restrictions identified by the faculty members' healthcare provider and/or with their written approval of the alternative schedule and/or assignment if within the leave period.

Raylene Rospond, Chair of the University Benefits Committee (UBC), was invited to address the body. She indicated that last year the UBC discussed and revised the staff sick leave. At that time the issue of faculty sick leave was first discussed. Provost Troyer appointed a subcommittee of Gary Johnson, John Edwards, Sue Wright and Ms. Rospond to consider this issue. The policy does not address a day to day illness, rather an extended time due to health issues away from the employee's work. The subcommittee reviewed what was being done already and this document is meant to address the inconsistencies which were found. The standard amount of time expressed in the document is six weeks. The document is meant to be a basis upon which case by case reviews can be made. Some faculty are employed for different portions of a year, such as nine or twelve months. The policy sets forth a minimum benefit. There are a maximum number of days to be on a leave based on the long term disability policy.

Senator Lovell asked for clarification about the 90 elimination days. Ms Rospond answered this with an example of how a person would accumulate a set of days up to the long term disability amount.

Senator Hunter asked if the committee was comfortable with these as minimum, indicating a concern that the minimum does not become the only way for the benefit to be used. Ms Rospond responded that the group had talked about this and wanted the university to have a basis for each college/school to know what that minimum was and make arrangement from that standard.

Senator Wright noted there was not a stated appeal process. Ms Rospond agreed that one was not written into this document. The group believed that there already were appeal avenues for personnel decisions. Senator Gillespie indicated support for the policy.

Ms. Rospond indicated that this document does not address all types of leave, only medical/injury. Senator Lovell asked and received an answer concerning institutional comparisons. The subcommittee believes this proposed policy to be in the middle of the road when compared to their sample. It was noted that some institutions did not have Faculty leaves for any reason.

The motion to recommend adoption of this policy passed.

Senator Reincke moved and B Sanders seconded motion 03-04:

The University Benefits Committee (UBC) develops policy for non medical leave.

Senator Shulman indicated that such a concrete policy would be nice to have.

The motion passed.

President Sanders began the discussion on the agenda item: All University Task Force on Tenure and Promotion. He indicated that there was not any faculty support for the creation of another layer of review. Approximately forty faculty provided feedback on the original RPAC proposal, either at the open forums or via emails. There was a willingness to have a task force set up to review existing policies and procedures in the various college/schools and library which are used to promote and provide tenure. The Faculty Senate Executive Committee has put forward a new proposal presented for discussion today. The intent of today's agenda item is to receive comments and put forth a motion for a Task Force in January 2003 if today's continuing discussion indicates the body is in favor of that process.
Senator Doughtery asked if this review could be done in house within each college/school with established committees as he saw this as really an assessment need. President Sanders indicated that the review might be accomplished by a combined committee from all the units.

Senator Reincke spoke in favor of the Task Force. Using the Women's Studies program as an example, there has been a sense of unclear requirements and procedures as this is an interdisciplinary, cross college unit. Senator Wright spoke also in favor of the review and hoped that there would be acknowledgment given to the AAUP university wide standards during such as review.

Senator Esposito asked if the existing Academic Freedom & Tenure (AFT) Committee would be right place to conduct such a review. Senator Wright did not believe that the nature of the AFT was the correct forum for such a procedural and process review. Senator Schaefer indicated that there must be a premise of perceived inconsistencies between units on campus. President Sanders indicated that yes, this is the perception from the RPAC documents that this is an underlying concern. Senator Schaefer then spoke in favor of such a Task Force based on the changing nature of cross college offerings and programs. Senator McKnight noted that the group would only be making recommendations which would be non-binding.

Provost Troyer shared with the body that most documents in use were implemented while Richard Hersch was employed at Drake. A major effort was needed then and little comprehensive effort has taken place since that time. He continued that he did not perceive this review to contain an evil intent in this request rather that the biggest concern is based in the desire to be compliant with case law concerning promotion and tenure.

Senator Lovell spoke in favor of a Task Force to find facts. He liked the first sentence of the first paragraph of the Rationale, but was not comfortable with the last three paragraphs of that section. He was in favor of the general goal of uniformity.

Senator Wright agreed with the responsibility for fact finding and felt that the rationale indicated a feeling of encouragement for the process. Senator Gillespie suggested that the selection process be specific that the faculty would select their representatives.

Senator Vitha indicated a concern about factoring in any 'grandfather' provisions for persons who started the review process under one set of guidelines and yet might be evaluated under a different set. Senator Shulman spoke as a person who was hired and operates in an interdisiplinary environment and has been subject to several administrative set of interpretations in a relatively short time period. He welcomed a set of consistent procedures and processes.

Senate Executive Committee will change this document and bring it forward as a motion next month.
Senator Shulman reminded the group that by the next Senate meeting, the country may be at war and that there would be appropriateness for a discussion of the role of a University during a time of conflict.

The meeting adjourned at 4:45 p.m. Submitted by Secretary, Nancy Geiger