DATE: March 17, 2014 TO: Senate Executive Committee FROM: Rob Dixon, Chair of School of Education Transition Team RE: Faculty Senate Representation Summary The Transition Team recommends allotting one specific seat on Faculty Senate for a faculty member who is considered a School of Education (SoE) member as defined in Faculty Senate policies (Article XII). Background The creation of a stand-­‐alone School of Education (SoE) was discussed at the September 26, 2013 Faculty Senate meeting and the final structure was presented in 2014. While there are a number of reasons behind the creation of a SoE that will be independent of CLS, some that stand out include reduced triangulation, greater advocacy for Teacher Education on and off campus, and it creates a building block for future growth and development. It is important to point out that not all programs that lead to DPI license are included in the new reporting structure of SoE. In light of this change, a transition team was created to facilitate this process. One of the charges was to liaison with the Faculty Senate Executive on having a seat or seats on the Senate. It is this charge that this document addresses. It is my understanding from an email with Anne Galbraith that this necessitates a change to the Articles of Organization. In order to make the change suggested, it requires a vote of two consecutive Senates and a campus-­‐wide faculty/IAS vote. It is the hope of the Transition Team that the Senate will act on this recommendation by the end of the current academic year so changes can be in place by 2015-­‐2016. While this is the first step in the representation of the SoE within faculty senate, the faculty senate committees may need to be changed to reflect the representation of SoE in faculty appointments to specific committees. These are by-­‐law changes and can be done in the next academic year in preparation of committee selections by Spring 2015. Recommendation • Current Senate Membership is composed of 24 members – 10 identified to represent the three colleges and 14 to represent at-­‐large members. In examining the 10 identified seats representing the colleges, representation of seats has changed over the years. In reviewing this information, the Transition Team recommends allotting a specific seat for a faculty member that identified as a School of Education member as articulated in the Faculty Senate policies Article XII (i.e., an instructor whose teaching assignment routinely involves instruction in pedagogical coursework). The table below shows the proposed change in historical context. College Before Merger After Merger Proposed (2005) (2015) CLS 4 5 4 SAH 3 4 4 CBA 1 1 1 HPERTE 2 NA NA SoE NA NA 1 From the information gathered, the Transition Team considered the size and distribution of programs across the Colleges. From an email from Anne Galbraith, it was estimated that the number of faculty within each college after the proposed changes would be the following: CLS = 206; SAH = 234; CBA = 68. With the transition of the Department of Educational Studies (DES) and the Institute of Professional Studies in Education (IPSE), the new SOE would have 23 members that report to the SoE Director for Promotion, Retention and Tenure (PRT) decisions. However, there are a number of faculty within CLS and SAH that have an interest in the PRT decisions within their Colleges, but their professional interests are defined by his/her enrolment in the SoE. Senate Policies define a faculty member of the SoE as operating in the various academic departments of the university, whose teaching assignment routinely involves instruction in pedagogical coursework (e.g., teaching and learning courses or methods courses). As such, the SoE Director provides input on the retention and promotion decisions of all SoE faculty regardless of their college affiliation. Thus, there is almost an equal split between members that have a home in a college and responsibilities to a teacher education/licensing program (CLS = 13; SAH = 21). This brings the total number of identified SoE faculty closely in line with the allocation of CBA. Implications to Move Forward Relevant Articles of Organization Many of the Senate’s Articles of Organization will remain intact with minor changes. Article IV.B.4 (Membership) At no time shall the senate include more than three senators from a single department; a maximum of two of these may be elected at large, and a maximum of one may be elected from the college. The Transition Team concurs that there should be no more than three members from a single department. The last word, “college” will have to be modified to include the three colleges and the School of Education. Articles IV.C.2 (Nomination Procedure) f. A faculty member shall be a nominee for only one position in only one category. The Transition Team concurs that a nominee should be for only one position and in only one category. There is nothing in the proposal that should impact this statement. Articles IV.C.4 (Department Affiliation) a. A member of the faculty shall be considered a member of the department to which he/she is appointed. A member of the faculty who holds appointments in more than one department shall choose the department with which he/she will be affiliated for the purposes of election. Department affiliation choice shall be recorded with the Senate Election Committee. Department affiliation may be changed at any time except the period between the dates that nomination petitions are due and the results of the election are published. A member of the faculty who is not appointed to a department shall be considered a member of the College of Liberal Studies. The Transition Team recognizes that the creation of the SoE has the distinct potential to have a number of faculty in CLS and SAH that also align with SoE for professional interests. It is recommended that the bylaw committee consider modifying the department affiliation to accommodate the SoE affiliation in a similar way. The Transition Team would point to Section XII of the Senate Policies (Teacher Education Programs/School of Education Faculty) for guidance on the identification of faculty eligibly to run and vote for the SoE senate seat. Points to Consider Pros • The redistribution of assigned faculty senate seats retains the proportion of assigned seats: 10 with the colleges and SoE and 14 considered at-­‐large. • The redistribution is in line with the past increase to CLS, which primarily reflected the inclusion of teacher education programs. • CBA and SAH remain unchanged in the number of seats that represent their faculty interests with their college assigned seats and at-­‐large seats unchanged with the transition. • The redistribution of faculty senate seats with an identified SoE faculty member gives a clear message to the importance of teacher preparation programs on campus. • This proposal retains the opportunity for all faculty to be guaranteed to have at least one voice on the faculty senate. If the proposal is denied, there will be a group of faculty that may not be represented because they do not belong to any of the currently identified colleges. Concerns • There may be a perception that the change is only for a specific department. It is important to articulate that the assigned SoE seat is not for a specific department on campus, but includes the larger designation of faculty to SoE. It is quite conceivable that no one from DES would be on Faculty Senate and the most that DES could have on the Senate is three seats – similar to any other department on campus. • The SoE senator may also be a member of CLS or SAH. This may lead to some confusion by the individual and his/constituents about whether or not the senator represents SoE or his/her home college. Whoever wins this seat should be •
considered a SoE senator first and foremost and should be listed in official communications as the SoE senator so that constituents know who their representative is. Finally, voting procedures will need to be modified. Currently, faculty identify with one specific college for electing an assigned college seat. Since SoE faculty are represented by both a specific College and the SoE, faculty that are designated with SoE faculty status should be allowed to vote for both the College-­‐specific seat and the SoE-­‐specific seat as well as the at-­‐large seats.