Faculty Senate Meeting
February 5, 2014, 2:30 pm, Noble 130
Senators attending: David Blake, Michelle Bonanno, Nancy Cardona, Beverly Chew, Jay
Dougan, Kathy Fine-Dare, Ginny Davis, Betty Dorr, Mary Ann Erickson, Michael Fry, Kris Greer,
Erik Juergensmeyer, Justin McBrayer, Kenny Miller, Astrid Oliver, Ellen Paul
Jennifer Rider, Chuck Riggs, Heidi Steltzer, Kaori Takano, Deborah Walker, Amy Wendland
Senators absent: Andy Gulliford, Melissa Knight-Maloney, Carrie Meyer
Guests: Jim Cross, Barbara Morris, Lisa Snyder, Phil Carter
Reports / Announcements:
President’s remarks – Chuck Riggs –



Minutes, any corrections? Minutes approved for Jan 29 as posted.
Email sent to Dene Thomas from VP at HLC that states yes, we do need to fill out the
substantive change request form, specifying the rationale, implementation, degree
completion, faculty and student support, and more. This will be posted on President’s
website. We do not need to complete form if we go back to 3 credit courses.
o Our HLC liaison has changed to Barbara Johnson, who is the woman who wrote
the letter to Dene Thomas
o Form did not exist at last accreditation; most recent version of form is 2012;
being retroactively applied.
o Hope when you share this highlight faculty are responding to survey; one that
stands out the most is the workload impacts
o Complexity really shows up when you look at the qualitative data
Course credit proposal survey results
o Feel safe commenting; group of faculty put this together
o Important that it went to voting faculty; adjunct do not have the same concerns
o Response rates were ~80% across all types of faculty; lowest at 40% for nontenure
o Most everyone was familiar with proposal
o Raw numbers and gross categories and broken out by faculty rank
o Only 14% felt proposal was not clear
o No direct quotes in qualitative comments
o Questions addressed different parts. Most faculty thought proposal address
workload issue in the sciences
o Overall workload was very mixed; ~57% thought there would be a negative
impact on workload.
o Only 17% did not support release time
o For pedagogy, 51% felt there would be a negative impact
o Varied responses for whether this would affect student progress towards degree
completion
o 59% faculty show some level of support for the proposal
1|Page
o Comments tend to weigh heavily towards negative responses; people stating no
support often commented, while people who saw it as positive did not comment
as often
o For comments, there was a lot to go through; broke down into manageable
workload by questions and included double blind with others reviewing the
summaries. Length of summaries is likely related to who wrote the summaries.
o Where does this go from here? Lives as public document on faculty senate
website. Amy will present this to the board at their meeting this week.
BOT Faculty Representative update



Complexities revealed by the survey; ex. the sciences workload issue suggests will be
more complex than the raw data suggests with really important sub-themes
BOT is very interested and will take time to look over survey results
Other suggestions or comments to bring forward at BOT meeting
o What is BOT voting on? They are voting on whether we go back to 3 credit
courses by Fall 2016. Not the details. Survey helps to flesh out discussions
should that happen.
o Barbara would have authority to move forward with other components of the
proposal
o Concern with document from AAUP posted on the president’s page. Are we a
AAUP chapter? Nancy stated that we are, but not yet listed on the AAUP
website. Scan charter and post on the website. Send to Mitch.
o Everyone is allowed to join. Will information be shared with everyone on
campus. Do not need to belong to chapter, can join individually as well. FLC
chapter is not yet part of the Colorado Delegation. Other groups in AAUP know
our chapter exists.
Report – TLC search update – Carrie Meyer
 Recorded summary from Carrie.
 Senate voted to support hiring of director at 50/50 position. Position posted in August,
but committee felt search was compromised, so search was put on hold.
 Committee will again be convened this spring to develop a more transparent process
 Contact Carrie with questions, if you have any.
 What are equal opportunity and integration into department issues? There was
assumption that departments would be glad to have additional faculty; wasn’t the case.
Not all candidates would have equal opportunity to be chosen. Revising process for
working with the departments to do a better job.
 New parameters need to return to faculty senate; 50/50 split position will require
committee to work much more closely with Haeryon and when to involve departments.
Person best for TLC may not be best person for department. Tricky position for hiring.
Person has to fit well with climate, culture, department; how to do in a transparent way.
50/50 split is unusual for this position. 75/25 is more typical. Don’t know if position
needs to be revisited.
2|Page



What were teaching fields of candidates? Wide range in beginning, including sociology,
writing, philosophy, chemistry and teacher ed in larger pool.
Clarity with members of search committee was not clear and will be improved; few
faculty on committee had experience starting a center.
Group will work on clarifying – will this be the same group? Some have resigned, so
Barbara will need to work with Chuck to identify new individuals to involve. Let her
know if you are interested.
New Business:
Handbook Changes – AAUP statement and academic dishonesty statement
 Incorporate AAUP statement into handbook; faculty looking for parallel changes in
academic dishonesty statement; wording is now parallel with changes in the academic
dishonesty statement.
 Change handbook and amend statement
Motion to put on the ballot by Bev Chew; seconded by Nancy Cardona. All in favor.
Senate Representation proposal discussion and vote
This is a constitution change and motion is to put it to a faculty vote.
Motion to put to a faculty vote by Justin McBrayer; seconded by Bev Chew.
Discussion:
 Would rather not have 8 at large members, and instead would include more
representation within groups
 Could be amended? Yes.
 Currently, senate representation is not distributed evenly
 How did everyone arrive at numbers?
 Failings of senate are that we do not represent our groups as well as we should
 Suggested 4 from sciences, 4 from arts and humanities and 5 at large
 More at large one has, the more equal representation should be theoretically
 3 from each is to guarantee that each group has some representation
 It could go either way. No department limits are included.
 Of course think about your area as senator, but try to look at things as a college-wide
perspective rather than to represent our specific schools/departments.
 Of course there are some biases
Call to question Justin McBrayer. All in favor; motion passes with no friendly modifications.
More stringent to pass this since change to constitution; needs to be more than a majority and
will be on a separate ballot. Encourage people to vote.
3|Page
Curriculum Committee Consent Items:







Some of these new course proposals, which include 4 credit courses, seem premature
given upcoming decision.
Proposed new courses in responses to requests from students in English. Nearly 200
courses in CC currently. Responses to students needs should be addressed, so moving
forward.
Hypothetically, would Barbara be willing to approve 4-credit courses? Barbara is
holding decisions on many of these until after Friday BOT vote.
Wholesale curriculum change would not make sense to do at this time.
Nuanced; ex. finance program is requesting change for a course that is already 4 credits.
Business also has another new program that would all be 4 credits.
4 credit courses on hold, but 3 credit with lab (leading to 4 credit course) would move
forward? Barbara is taking it case by case; Biology would likely move forward.
If we don’t do anything it goes forward, but we’ve typically voted.
No motion; but recognition that will move forward to Barbara Morris.
Motion to adjourn Bev Chew; seconded by Betty Dorr. Meeting adjourned at 3:26pm.
4|Page