Agenda
FACULTY SENATE MEETING
September 2, 2014
Cedar/Maple, MSC
2:30 – 4:30 P.M.
I.
Call to Order (Chair, Nelu Ghenciu)
1. Group Photograph, Brett Roseman
2. Introductions
II.
Roll Call – Sign Attendance Sheet
III. Minutes of May 12, 2014 (Attachment 1)
IV. Administration Reports
1. Chancellor’s Report
2. Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs’ Report
3. Final Campus Climate Survey Report shared by PARQ Office
(https://info.uwstout.edu/uwstout%20document%20library/surveys/faculty%20staff%20surveys
/campus%20climate%20surveyfaculty%20%EF%BC%86%20staff/2014/campusclimatesurveyfaculty%EF%BC%86staffexecutivesummary20140801.pdf)
V. Announcements
1. Other
2. Deb Gehrke introducing Erin Dunbar, HR Manager of Employee Relations
VI. Welcome to New and Returning Senators
1. Faculty Senate Roles and Expectations
a. Guidelines and Training for Faculty Senate Representatives (Attachment 2)
b. Expectations of Senators – (Attachment 3)
2. Governance White Paper (Attachment 4)
3. Senate Structure, Simplified Parliamentary Procedure (Attachment 5)
4. Robert’s Rules of Order Solecisms (Attachment 6)
VII. Unfinished Business
1. Discussion/Decision Items
a. Supplemental Compensation Update – Phase 3
b. Engagement Session Feedback
VIII. New Business
1. Upcoming Elections
a. Election Committee for 2014-15
a. All University Promotions Committee – Ballots sent on 08/27/2014
2. Committee Approvals
a. Election of College Representatives to the Faculty Senate Executive Committee
3. Discussion/Decision Items
a. Other
4. EAC to update the credit hour definition (Attachment 7)
5. Charge from Chancellor Sorensen dated May 23, 2014 (Attachment 8)
IX.
X.
Information Items
1. Faculty Senate Meeting Schedule 2014-2015 (Attachment 9)
2. Faculty Senate Dashboard (Attachment 10)
3. Statement of SCOPE for Administrative Rules –Chapters 4 & 7, Chapter 11 and Chapter 17
(Attachment 11)
Adjournment
CHAIR: Petre Ghenciu
VICE CHAIR: Ana VandeLinde
Minutes
FACULTY SENATE MEETING
May 12, 2014
Ballroom B, MSC
2:30 – 4:30 P.M.
SECRETARY: Kevin Drzakowski
Attachment 1
PRESENT: Anne Antonippillai, Amanda Barnett, Lopa Basu, Bryan Beamer, Tim Becker, Kathleen Deery, Mark
Fenton, Kevin Drzakowski, Bert Fraher, Petre Ghenciu, Gene Gutman, Glenda Jones, Anne Kerber, John Schultz,
Matthew Kuchta, Virginia Lea, Eun Joo Lee, Amanda Little, Tim Tozer, Silvia Ruiz-Tresgallo, Forrest Schultz,
Kevin W. Tharp, Loretta Thielman, Cameron Weaver, Bob Zeidel, Julie Zaloudek
ABSENT: Eric Brey, Carol Johnson, Marlann Patterson, Kelly Schultz (excused), DeLeana Strohl (excused),
Steven Terry, Ana VandeLinde (excused), Brandon Wayerski
GUESTS: Seth Dutter, Phil Lyons, Chancellor Sorenson, Jackie Weissenburger
I. Call to Order (Chair, Nelu Ghenciu) The meeting was called to order at 2:30 p.m.
II. Roll Call – Sign Attendance Sheet
III. Minutes of April 8, 2014
Motion to approve: Little/Fenton
No date has been set for the workload report.
Passed. 2 Abstentions.
IV. Administration Reports
1. Chancellor’s Report
- The Chancellor thanked Chair Ghenciu for his commencement address and everyone for
allowing him to serve over the last 26 years.
- He spoke on the value of shared governance on campus.
- Chair Ghenciu thanked the Chancellor for a very productive year.
2. Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs’ Report
- The Provost also thanked Chair Ghenciu for giving the commencement speech.
- The three commencement ceremonies over the weekend were well-attended and
successful.
- Enrollment is up slightly compared to this point in time last year.
- The Chancellor and Provost will implement funding for a pilot for reassigned time for
those receiving large grants for the first year.
- Kevin W. Tharp is working on a cross college proposal for a B.S. in Web Technology
program. This development is partially funded through a gift from Thompson-Reuters.
- The Provost was asked if only the first part of the Reassigned Time proposal was being
funded. At this time, only this is being funded.
V. Announcements
1. Chancellor Search & Screen Committee Update – Nelu Ghenciu
- Two more candidates are coming tomorrow and Thursday. Everyone is encouraged to
attend.
- Those attending the candidate events are encouraged to submit their comments via the
search website.
2. Miscellaneous Business
VI. Unfinished Business
1. Discussion/Decision Items
a. Reassigned Time Proposal – Mandy Little
Motion to approve: Lea/Thielman
Moving forward with phase 1, large grants. We are hoping to move ahead with phase 2 in the
near future.
Friendly amendment was proposed and accepted to include diversity as a criterion.
Add: Increased equity, diversity, and inclusion in terms of student academic outcomes and
faculty retention.
Passed Unanimously.
VII. New Business
1. Discussion/Decision Items
a. Course Approval Process & Workflow – CIC
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Motion to approve: Little/Barnett
The CIC worked to find ways to improve the speed of courses moving through the process. The
committee found that the steps in the process were good, but meeting schedules should be
revised.
Passed Unanimously.
Classroom Scheduling Policy - EAC – Scott Correll and Phil Lyons
Motion to approve: Little/Tharp
- This policy came out of the Huron Report’s recommendations.
- The Huron Report showed that even in our peak hours we were at 80% classroom
usage.
- System is emphasizing the importance of classroom utilization in capital project
decisions. Using classroom space fully will help us make a better case for new space.
- A subcommittee of faculty developed the policy which creates definitions for several
different types of classrooms; establishes peak and non-peak meeting patterns; and
outlines priorities for assigning classrooms.
- This policy will mostly apply to our general-use classrooms, rather than labs.
- With Harvey offline, we have 66 general use classrooms, plus ten additional spaces
being used as classrooms.
- The presenters were asked if accessibility included access to distance education
equipment. Accessibility refers mainly to access for instructors with disabilities.
- Some classes have switched to an online format while Harvey is offline. The decision
of whether to offer a class online or in-person rests with a department. The importance
of monitoring these courses was stressed.
Passed Unanimously.
Equal Opportunities in Education Committee – Jeff Boerner (CSTEM) has volunteered and
needs to be approved.
All committee slots have been filled, pending approval of Boerner.
Motion to approve: Basu/Fenton
Passed Unanimously.
GE Course Approval Form – GEC
Motion to approve: Zeidel/Thielman
- The GEC worked to clarify the definitions for SRER courses and Contemporary
Issues.
- One change proposed is that syllabi must state the relevant GE objective(s).
- The Contemporary Issue courses must be in the proposer’s specialty discipline and
housed in his or her department.
Passed Unanimously.
Collegiality FASLA Handbook Language – PPC
Motion to approve: Barnett/Deery
- The Senate already approved using the AAUP’s statement on collegiality. The
proposal is to put the statement with the section on academic freedom in FASLA.
Passed Unanimously.
Synchronization of Promotion and Tenure FASLA Language - PPC
Option A
Motion to approve Option A: Basu/Beamer
- This option will make promotion to associate professor automatic with tenure, given
time in rank and educational prep criteria are met.
- Faculty members currently at Stout and those who have already been hired would have
the option of the old policy or the new one. Contracts that start after August 25, 2014
will use the new process.
Passed Unanimously.
Option B
Planning & Review – Loretta Thielman
Self-Study, Consultant Report, and Deans Response are included for the following:
B.S. in Family and Consumer Sciences Education
BFA in Studio Art
Motion to approve the self-studies, consultant reports, and dean’s response for both
programs above: Fenton/Little
Passed Unanimously.
NOI – B.S. in Web Technology
Motion to approve: Thielman/Deery
- Kevin Tharp presented the Notice of Intent-to-Plan. The proposed program comes
from working with industry and identifying a need for graduates with a certain skillset.
- The program is intended to offer a degree with a broad focus.
- It will use as many existing resources and courses as possible.
- There is currently a minor in the area now. A certificate program is scheduled to start
in September.
- Tharp noted that there is a great deal of demand for web technology workers.
- Tharp was asked about avoiding overlap between the Professional Communication and
Emerging Media program and this new program. He answered that this degree
incorporates programming, design, and usability, making it substantially different.
Passed Unanimously.
PRC Annual Report
Motion to approve: Deery/Beamer
Passed Unanimously.
h. Miscellaneous Business
- Appreciation was expressed for outgoing Senators and for Brenda Krueger, who will
be pursuing graduate studies and working part-time in the Applied Research Center
next year.
- Linda Borofka has accepted the Senate Office position. She will be stepping down
from her position in the Provost’s Office. The transition will occur at the end of June.
Welcome Linda!
- Chair Ghenciu encouraged all senators to keep him apprised of issues they feel need
attention.
- Appreciation was also expressed for Chair Ghenciu’s work this year.
- Chair Ghenciu thanked the Chancellor for his service as a means of closing the
meeting.
VIII. Information Items
1 Faculty Senate Dashboard
2. Engagement Session Flyer
3. Miscellaneous Business
IX. Adjournment. The meeting was adjourned at 3:28 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kevin Drzakowski, Secretary
Recorded and prepared by,
Brenda Krueger
Attachment 2
Guidelines and Training for Faculty Senate Representatives
and FS Committee Members
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Summer 2013
New FS Chair, Vice-chair, and FS standing committee Chairs could take an online training course
at http://parliamentarians.org/wbtbasics.php for $125 for 60 days.
Opening Week Book Discussion:
Tribal Leadership: Leveraging Natural Groups to Build a Thriving Organization
Invite all FS reps and FS committee members; have a system for sign-up and those who sign-up
will received a free copy of the book by mid-August.
1.5 hour discussion during Opening Week
Refreshments?
First Faculty Senate Meeting of Fall 2013
Meet 30 minutes earlier; invite all FS committee members in addition to the FS representatives
Handout: Roberts Rules of Order with links for additional information [see Handout 3 below]
Handout: FS Chapter Chapter 36 and FS committee charges [see Handout 4 below]
Discuss the role of representatives on the FS and on the various committees.
o The general responsibilities of all committee members or reps: importance of regular
attendance, preparation, role of alternates, etc.).
o Ethics and conflicts of interest in terms of personal/unit/dept/college/institution needs and
concerns: who do we represent?
First FS Standing Committee Meetings of Fall 2013
FS Chair also attends; reviews representative responsibilities and committee charge with
committee chair.
Extra handouts from the FS meeting for those who did not attend.
If there is an expressed desire for additional training, the following websites could be used for a 2
hour training on Roberts Rules of Order and FS committee charges.
Part 1 Efficient and Effective Meetings using Roberts Rules of Order
1. In plain English, this file describes the purpose for using Robert's Rules of Order as well as the
main actions committee members and committee chairs need to know.
http://westcumb.ca/Constitution/Simplified%20Roberts%20Rules%20of%20Order.pdf
(handout 1)
a. Have a training facilitator go through just the first section, then run an actual, brief,
committee meeting using volunteers to show the basics of opening a meeting, making a
motion, discussing the motion, voting, and closing the meeting.
b. To keep everyone awake and keep the training moving along, I suggest handing out this
more formal outline http://gsa.ucalgary.ca/about/docs/Roberts-Rules-Cheat-Sheet.pdf
(handout 2) along with a written scenario for each group of 5 attendees. Give them 15
minutes to read through the scenario and decide on the proper procedure using Robert's
Guidelines for Faculty Senate, page 1
Rules of Order. Each group can then present their solution. This process allows the training
to cover 5-7 special situations in a short period of time.
2. To conclude Part 1, I suggest making a one page handout (handout 3) with the following items
for further review –
a. Page 7 of this pdf has a Cheat Sheet
http://www.cityofmadison.com/attorney/documents/RobertsRulesGuide.pdf
b. Add these links to the Cheat Sheet
• The most recent version, 2011 RORN (Rules of Order Newly Revised), is available at
http://www.robertsrules.com/history.html.
• The 4th edition is online with an outline for quick references at
http://www.rulesonline.com/rror_01.htm.
• Additional information for committee chairs at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvLDlPlxaRg How to be an Effective Chair (8
mins.) Along with many other videos about motions etc.
Part 2 Committee By-laws and Charges for UW-Stout Faculty Senate and its Committees
In separate rooms, the FS Senate Chair and the previous year's committee chairs can train the new
committee members. (FS Chair will have to rotate through the committees while the FS vice-chair
trains the FS reps. Or vice versa.)
1. FS chair/vice chair will discuss with each committee -• UW-System legal meaning of "shared governance" Chapter 36 at
http://www.uwsa.edu/bor/statutes.htm and also this recent discussion
http://eduoptimists.blogspot.com/2012/11/shared-governance-in-uw-system.html . I suggest a
useable 1 page handout with the pertinent parts of Ch. 36 (handout 4).
2. Each of the following committee Chairs will review and discuss their charge and by-laws with their
new (and experienced) members in separate rooms. For training purposes, I suggest developing
problematic scenarios to be discussed by new and experienced members to highlight various
responses and solutions that apply the charges, by-laws, and Roberts Rules of Order.
• Faculty Senate at https://www.uwstout.edu/facultysenate/index.cfm
o Review Constitution (1 page handout?), Ch. 36 as it impacts FS specifically.
o Bylaws at https://www.uwstout.edu/hr/unclhdbk.cfm , Chapter 2.
o List of FS Standing Committees. Reps should be aware that faculty are in control of and have
power on these committees. If we don't volunteer, we lose our right to exercise our voice in
these areas. Be aware that faculty populate and control these committees under the
auspices of Faculty Senate:
 Finance Committee
 Curriculum and Instruction Committee
• Racial and Ethnic Studies Committee
 Educational Activities Committee
 General Education Committee
 Graduate Education Committee
 Personnel Policies Committee
 Planning and Review Committee
Guidelines for Faculty Senate, page 2
o Also, review any current sub-committees as well as university committees that have FS reps
on them (e.g., Elections, Website, Diversity Leadership Team). That is, make the new
Senators aware that in addition to the FS meetings, they are also expected to volunteer for
additional committees.
o Review Resolutions? See FS web page above, and click on link to the left.
•
Finance Committee: By-laws and charge at https://www.uwstout.edu/facultysenate/fc.cfm
•
Curriculum and Instruction Committee:
o Purpose and Objectives at
https://www.uwstout.edu/admin/provost/currhb/ciccomm.cfm
o By-laws at https://www.uwstout.edu/admin/provost/currhb/bylawscic.cfm
o Other information at
https://www.uwstout.edu/admin/provost/currhb/curriculumhelp.cfm
•
Racial and Ethnic Studies Committee: By-laws at
https://www.uwstout.edu/admin/provost/currhb/escmembers.cfm
•
Educational Activities Committee: https://www.uwstout.edu/facultysenate/edactmem.cfm but
only refers to "FASLA Handbook pages 2-16 to 2-17, September, 2003"
•
General Education Committee:
o By-laws at https://www.uwstout.edu/admin/provost/currhb/gebylaws.cfm
o GE Objectives and other information at
https://www.uwstout.edu/admin/provost/currhb/gened.cfm
•
Graduate Education Committee: By-laws at https://www.uwstout.edu/grad/faculty/index.cfm
•
Personnel Policies Committee:
o Responsibilities listed at https://www.uwstout.edu/facultysenate/ppc.cfm
o Link for the By-law pdf is not working.
•
Planning and Review Committee:
o By-laws at http://www.uwstout.edu/admin/provost/prc-bylaws.cfm
o Other information at http://www.uwstout.edu/admin/provost/prc.cfm
Guidelines for Faculty Senate, page 3
Attachment 3
List of Expectations for Faculty Senate Expectations for the Faculty Senate Chair and its Officers
· Begin meetings promptly and stick to the schedule.
· Respect and value senators time and bring forth agendas which reflect this.
· Cultivate good relations between the faculty senate and administration.
· Work to promote and inspire trust.
· Chair and Officers should treat everyone equally.
· Be a representative and staunch advocate for all faculty while respecting Administration’s points of view for the purpose of promoting a good working relationship with the administration to foster the objectives of the faculty. Expectations for Faculty Senators and Guests
· Arrive in a timely fashion.
· Participate in discussions during Senate meetings.
· Be willing to serve on committees needing Faculty Senate representation.
· Stay the full duration of the meeting unless otherwise excused
· Please do not grade papers, browse the internet or answer emails during senate session; be mindful of possible distractions. Snacks and drinks are OK, but please avoid ravenous feasts.
· Communicate diligently to your constituents senate activities and actively seek out feedback.
Attachment 4
Governance White Paper
Ned Weckmueller (March, 2009)
“Governance – Remember the Basics”
Many (no doubt, most and probably all) of you weren’t around in the 1980’s when we
completely reorganized the UW-Stout governance structure. To understand why we are
organized the way we are, it might be helpful to take a look back.
The original Chapter 36 of the Wisconsin Statutes (circa 1972), that established the UW-System
as (basically) the way we know it today, spelled out the primary responsibilities the major
players in the UW System. They are the: Board of Regents, President (of the system),
Chancellors, Faculty, Academic Staff, Students.
Each of these players has their own set of responsibilities. If you are interested in specifics, go
to: http://www.legis.state.wi.us/statutes/Stat0036.pdf
According to Chapter 36, the primary responsibilities of the faculty of each institution are:
“subject to the responsibilities and powers of the board, the president and the chancellor of such
institution, shall be vested with responsibility for the immediate governance of such institution
and shall actively participate in institutional policy development. As such, the faculty shall have
the primary responsibility for academic and educational activities and faculty personnel
matters. The faculty of each institution shall have the right to determine their own faculty
organizational structure and to select representatives to participate in institutional
governance.”
As such, in line with these responsibilities, the Faculty Senate at UW-Stout decided to form five
major standing committees: Curriculum and Instruction, Personnel Policies, Program Review,
Educational Activities, Budget and Finance (now Finance)
In theory, and in fact practice for many years, these committees covered all of the
responsibilities of the faculty. Subsequently, we have “upgraded” several other committees to
standing committee status mainly due to the volume of work they were required to do, and not
because they couldn’t function as subcommittees of the original standing committees (e.g. GEC
could be a subcommittee of CIC).
Additionally, the Faculty decided to organize separately from the Academic Staff. More likely,
since the Faculty already had a “Senate”, and did not invite the Academic Staff to be part of
that group, the Academic Staff formed their own group (I don’t remember the details of that
decision).
Since the University was organized by Schools (now colleges) the Faculty Senate decided to
insure representation from those groups by having Senators elected to represent “At Large”,
“School (we didn’t have colleges in those days),” and “Other”. At that time, there were few
Academic Staff, since before that category was designated in Chapter 36, most of the positions
that are now filled by Academic Staff were staffed by people with Faculty appointments.
That system of representation underwent several evolutionary changes. The biggest change
was to change representation so that every department would have a senator. This change
occurred about a dozen years ago. Prior to that change, people from small departments often
could not get a senator elected, and people from large departments could “block vote” to
increase their chances of having both At-Large and School senators.
The present system keeps the number of Senators relatively constant, by attempting to
proportionally represent each College (i.e., Colleges with many departments may have few AtLarge College Senators, while large colleges with only a few departments should have more AtLarge College Senators).
Historically, the purpose of the Faculty Senate was to conduct business relative to the
responsibilities outlined in Chapter 36. The vast majority of business was conducted at the
committee level, recommendations were made to the Senate, the Senate debated the
recommendations and voted on policy.
Attachment 5
Simplified Parliamentary Procedure
I. USUAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
A. Call to order
B. Roll call
C. Minutes, read and approved or corrected
D. Report of committees
1. Standing committees
2. Special committees
E. Unfinished or old business
F. New business
G. Announcements
H. Adjournment
II. PROPER PROCEDURE FOR HANDLING A MOTION
A. Member rises or signifies they would like to speak and addresses chairperson
B. Chairperson recognizes member by saying name or nodding
C. Member states motion
D. Chairperson asks for a second if one is not offered voluntarily
E. Chairperson states the motion.
F. Chairperson asks for discussion if it a debatable motion.
G. When discussion ceases, chairperson restates motion and asks for a vote.
H. Chairperson gives results of vote and declares the motion passed or failed.
(Some motions do not require all 8 steps see section III for variations.)
III.
MOTIONS MOST OFTEN USED DURING A MEETING Motions have rank or
precedence, those of lower rank yield to those of higher rank, resulting in more than one motion of the floor
at one time. A higher ranking motion can be moved during the discussion period of the motion before the
assembly. The following motions are listed according to their rank, starting with the lowest.
A. The main motion (a proposal of an activity for an organization)
1. Phraseology example: “I move that we have a party.”)
2. Rules for procedure:
a. Requires the 8 steps as described in proper procedure, section II.
b. Majority vote
B. Amendment (a change in a motion by adding, subtracting or substituting words)
1. Phraseology example: “I move we amend the motion by adding the word
"Christmas" before the word "party".”
2. Rules for the procedure:
a. Requires 8 steps in as described in proper procedure
b. Majority vote
3. An amendment to an amendment changes or modifies the original
amendment. Say, “I move we amend the amendment by...”. Use same rules
for procedure as above for the original amendment.
C. Refer to committee (having a special group investigate or arrange necessary
details to carry out the motion)
1. Phraseology example: “I move we refer this matter of a Christmas party
to the program committee..”
2. Rules for procedure:
a. Requires the 8 steps in proper procedure
b. Majority vote
D. Postpone to a certain day (a motion which allows the motion to be postponed
until a later meeting)
1. Phraseology example: “I move we postpone consideration of this motion
until the next meeting.”
2. Rules for procedure:
a. Requires 8 steps in proper procedure
b. Majority vote
E. Close debate (to stop discussion upon the motion)
1. Phraseology example: “I move we close debate and vote immediately on
the pending question.”
2. Rules for procedure:
a. Requires 7 steps of the proper procedure - omit discussion (step F)
b. Two-thirds vote
F. Lay on the table (motion sets aside the motion for later consideration)
1. Phraseology example: “I move we table this motion concerning the
Christmas party.”
2. Rules for procedure:
a. Requires 7 steps of the proper procedure - omit discussion (step F)
b. Majority vote
3. Motion to take from the table is the method used to bring the motion back
on the floor for discussion after a period of time has elapsed, Say, “I move
we take from the table the motion...”. The same rules as for lay on the table
apply.
IV. OTHER USEFUL MOTIONS
A. Withdraw a motion (to retract, recall or take back a proposed motion)
1. Phraseology example: “I wish to withdraw the motion concerning the
party.” Note: This motion is made by the originator of the motion.
2. Rules for procedure:
a. If a member objects to the withdrawal, a motion by another
member is in order. (example: "I move that Senator Smith be
permitted to withdraw her motion.")
b. Requires 7 steps of the procedure- omit requirement of a second.
(step D)
c. Majority vote.
B. Reconsider (motion to bring an old motion on to the floor)
1. Phraseology example: “I move we reconsider the vote on the motion to
have a party.”
2. Rules for procedure:
a. Requires 6 steps of the proper procedure - omit interruption of
speaker (step A) and recognition by chairperson (step B)
b. Majority vote
C. Point of order (member indicates an error in parliamentary procedure)
1. Phraseology example: “I rise to a point of order.”
2. Rules for procedure:
a. May interrupt a speaker; does not need recognition; does not need a
second
b. Decision made by chairperson
D. Parliamentary inquiry (member tactfully asks if an error has been made in
parliamentary procedure)
1. Phraseology example: “I rise for parliamentary inquiry.”
2. Rules for procedure: same as for point of order
E. Division (to obtain an accurate account of the vote)
1. Phraseology example: “I call for division.”
2. Rules for procedure: same as for point of order
F. Questions of privilege (to bring up urgent matter concerning personal comfort)
1. Phraseology example: “I rise to a question of privilege,”
2. Rules for procedure: same as for point of order
G. Adjourn (motion to end the present meeting)
1. Phraseology example: “I move we adjourn.”
2. Rules for procedure:
a. Requires 7 steps in proper procedure - omit discussion
b. Majority vote
How to Attempt to Carry or Defeat Motions
How to attempt to pass a motion
1. Second the motion immediately.
2. Give arguments for it during the
discussion.
6. Move to refer it to a committee to
delay action.
7. Move to postpone it to the next
meeting to delay action.
3. Vote for the motion.
8. Move to close debate to stop further
discussion of good points.
4. Vote against any motion to postpone
the motion indefinitely.
9. Move to table the motion.
5. Move to amend it, to perfect or
improve it.
6. Vote against the motion to refer.
7. Vote against the motion to postpone.
8. Vote against the motion to close
debate.
9. Vote against the motion to table.
10. Vote against the motion to recess.
11. Vote against the motion to
reconsider.
12. Carry out motions immediately, so
the motion to rescind cannot be used.
13. Vote against motion to adjourn.
14. The only way to carry a motion is to
get the votes. Have your supporters at
the meeting and encourage them to vote
your way.
How to attempt to defeat a motion
1. Do not second the motion.
2. Give arguments against it during the
discussion.
3. Vote against the motion.
4. Move to postpone indefinitely in an
attempt to “kill” it.
5. Move to amend it to make it
undesirable or complicated.
10. Move to take a recess to delay the
discussion and strengthen your side.
11. If opponents win, move to reconsider
the motion.
12. If opponents win and action has not
been taken, move to rescind it.
13. Move to adjourn in order to prevent
voting.
14. The best way to defeat a motion is to
vote it down. Get your supporters to the
meeting. Encourage them to stay and
vote your way.
Attachment 6
Robert’s Rules of Order FAQ
August 2008
Steve Deckelman
1. What is Robert’s Rules of Order? And who was Robert and why do we care? Robert’s is a 643
page tome on the rules of parliamentary procedure. Since 1876 there have been ten(10)
editions. Only the most recent, Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised , 10th edition, 2000, is
considered current and binding. Robert’s is also a rule book on procedure. In lay terms,
Robert’s may be thought of as a compendium of best practices in the conduct of meetings
where decisions are made. The UW-Stout Faculty Senate Constitution and Bylaws prescribes
Robert’s as its parliamentary authority.
2. How does Robert’s fit into the broader framework of state law and University policy? Generally
speaking, higher level rules supersede lower level rules. The highest level rules include state
law, UW-System and University Policy, Faculty Senate bylaws, and then Robert’s. For example
the Faculty Senate’s own bylaws trump Robert’s in instance of conflict. In essence, Robert’s
contains default rules not otherwise covered by higher policies.
3. How complicated are Robert’s Rules? About 80% of the time only 20% or Robert’s is actually
used. While there are some complexities to Robert’s, it’s based on underlying principles which
are committed to fairness and rationality in ways that recognize the will of the majority while
respecting the voice of the minority. Robert’s Rules in many ways amounts to just common
sense. Nevertheless, there are many common misconception and solecisms committed in the
name of Robert’s Rules. Some of these follow.
1.
A motion to table is undebatable. FALSE. Usually what is meant here is a motion to
postpone. Motions to postpone are always debatable since otherwise opponents of a
motion could use it to suppress discussion. A true motion to “Lay on the Table” is rarely
used and is only in order when there is some urgent need to temporarily put something
aside(e.g. another matter needing immediate attention because of a deadline etc., fire drills,
acts of God etc.) In particular, there is no such thing as a motion to “table indefinitely”.
(RONR pp 121-124, 189-201, 207-209, 258-261)
2. Debate can be terminated by someone calling the question. FALSE. The proper Robert’s
usage here is moving the previous question. If one person objects (no unanimous consent),
a 2/3 majority vote is required to terminate debate and force a vote. (RONR pp193-194,
199, 189-201)
Basic Principle of Robert’s: Except in possibly extraordinary circumstances, it is
improper to prevent debate or kill a motion for the purpose of suppressing discussion.
3. The chair controls the agenda. FALSE. Not exactly. Ordinarily, Robert’s would require
approval of the agenda by the assembly (senate) itself, but at UW-Stout, Faculty Senate
bylaws prescribe that the agenda is determined by the chair in consultation with the
executive committee. This is a bit vague, but by custom, this has usually occurred by
unanimous consent. In principle however, Robert’s says that the Senate itself could
intervene and change the agenda if it so wished.
4. The chair should take position on issues which bring to bear his/her personal viewpoints and
convictions. FALSE. The chair should be an impartial facilitator so that senators on both
sides of an issue will feel treated fairly. In particular, the chair should not participate in
(take positions in) debate.
5. A “tie” is an indeterminate vote. FALSE. A tie means the motion failed. This applies in all
cases where the decision is to be made through simple majority vote.
6. In matters of policy interpretation(e.g. bylaws and rules of order) there is no “supreme
court” to resolve conflicting interpretations of policy ambiguities. FALSE. Subject to some
reasonable restrictions, the Senate itself is the court and can decide on a proper
interpretation of vague policy through a majority vote. Of course if so, it may be appropriate
to revise existing policy to avoid the problem in the future. (RONR pp243-244)
7. The chair only votes to break ties. FALSE. The chair always votes if the vote is by ballot. If by
voice vote, the chair can vote if it would result in a change in the outcome. The chair can
vote to create a tie or break a tie. (Note: tie= failed motion). But: THE CHAIR MAY NOT
VOTE TWICE. (RONR pp392-393)
8. The chair decides whether a vote will be by voice, show of hands, or ballot. FALSE. Again,
not exactly. The chair usually does decide this, but if a member disagrees, he/she may
make the motion that the vote be by ballot. This can be sustained with a majority vote. In
general, if a senator disagrees with a ruling by the chair, he/she may Appeal a decision
made by the chair. The details are described in RONR, (pp247-253).
Basic Principle of Robert’s: The assembly itself (i.e. the senate itself-not the chair
nor its officers) hold final authority over the proceedings and is the final judge and
arbiter of all issues.
9. Ex Officio members cannot vote. FALSE. They can indeed vote. For example, an ex officio
member appointed to the Faculty Senate would have the same rights and privileges of any
senator. However note: in some special instances, they are not included in the quorum
count. But they CAN vote and they CAN debate. (RONR, pp466-467)
10. A motion that is adopted without being seconded is void. FALSE. If a motion were made,
debated, but never seconded, and passed, it would be assumed to have been seconded
because members passed it. Indeed, if a motion is made, and the chair initiates debate, it is
already too late to call a point of order. (RONR pp243-244)
11. A quorum requirement is not a hard and fast rule. FALSE. If there is not a quorum, or if
members leave and the quorum is lost during the course of the meeting, any substantive
action taken is invalid. (RONR pp334-340)
Planning, Assessment, Research and Quality
Attachment 7
University of Wisconsin-Stout
P.O. Box 790
Menomonie, WI 54751-0790
715/232-5308 office
715/232-5406 fax
DATE:
August 6, 2014
TO:
Nelu Ghenciu
Chair, Faculty Senate
c:
via electronic mail
Linda Borofka
Assistant to the Faculty and Academic Staff Senates
FROM:
Higher Learning Commission Assurance Argument Team
Meridith Drzakowski, chair
Kristi Krimpelbein
Glendali Rodriguez
Jackie Weissenburger
RE:
Credit Hour Definition
In March, 2016, UW-Stout will be reviewed by the Higher Learning Commission as part of our
10-year accreditation cycle. One of the items that we are required to provide to them is our
credit hour definition. Specifically, we must address the following:
“Institutions should make sure that they have a policy at the institutional or department level that
explains how credit hours are allocated to courses and programs. The policy should be in writing
and take into account the federal definition of the credit hour as well as commonly accepted
practice in higher education. Such policies are typically expected to distinguish among
departments or disciplines. The policies should take into account such matters as practica,
clinical rotations, compressed terms, and distance delivery.”
Further, the criteria state:
“Institutions that provide instruction through on-line, alternative, compressed, or other formats
should have policies that expressly address how that learning is determined, organized, and
evaluated and how the institution goes about determining instructional equivalencies.”
In 2012, the Educational Activities Committee developed a Credit Hour Definition that was
approved by the Faculty Senate and then approved by the Chancellor.
We are requesting your assistance in reviewing this Credit Hour Definition to ensure that it
meets the Higher Learning Commission requirement, particularly in terms of compressed courses
and graduate vs. undergraduate instruction.
Any updates to the Credit Hour Definition would be appreciated by May 22, 2015.
Thank you for your assistance with this important project, and please let us know if you have any
questions.
Attachment 8
Attachment 9
FACULTY SENATE MEETING SCHEDULE
2014-2015
SEMESTER I
August 22
September 2
September 5
September 16
September 19
September 30
October 3
October 14
October 22
October 10
October 28
October 24
November 4
November 7
November 18
November 21
December 2
November 28
December 9
December 5
December 16
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Cedar/Maple, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate Executive Committee, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Cedarwood, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Ballroom B, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate Executive Committee, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Birch, MSC
- ADVISEMENT DAY; NO CLASSES
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Ballroom C
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate Executive Committee, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Cedarwood, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Ballroom A, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate Executive Committee, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Cedarwood, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Ballroom A, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate, 2:30 -4:30 p.m., Ballroom A, MSC
January 9
January 20
January 23
February 3
February 6
February 17
February 20
March 10
March 17
March 13
March 24
March 27
April 7
April 10
April 21
April 24
May 5
May 1
May 12
SEMESTER II
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate Executive Committee, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Cedarwood, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Ballroom A, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate Executive Committee, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Cedarwood, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Ballroom A, MSC
- SPRING BREAK; NO CLASSES
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate Executive Committee, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Cedarwood, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Ballroom A, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate Executive Committee, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Cedarwood, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate, 2:30-4:30 p.m., Ballroom A, MSC
- Agenda Item(s) Submission Deadline
- Faculty Senate, 2:30 -4:30 p.m., Ballroom A, MSC
FACULTY SENATE DASHBOARD FOR 2014-2015
Status Indicator Colors: Green (Good) , Yellow (Minor Issues), Red (Major Issues), Gray (Complete), no color (not yet started)
Charges/Other
Staff Responsible
Request Approved by
FS
Results or
Recommendation
Presented to FS
Final
Recommendation
Approved by FS
Recommendation
Approved by
Chancellor
Recommendation
Implemented
Draft or
Recommendation
Presented to FS
Final
Recommendation
Approved by FS
Recommendation
Approved by
Chancellor
Policy Added to Website
Recommendation
Approved by
Chancellor
Recommendation
Implemented
Final
Recommendation
Approved by FS
Recommendation
Approved by
Chancellor
Recommendation
Implemented
Distribute Ballots
Collect Ballots
Count Ballots
Send Congratulations
Letters
8/27/2014
Due 9/5/2014
Due 9/9/2014
Due 9/11/2014
Action Items to be sent
to Diversity Leadership
Team by 10/15/14
Campus Climate Survey Review
Policies
Charge Requested
Attachment 10
Staff Responsible
Policy Requested
Request Approved by
FS
Glenda Jones
8/22/2012
8/22/2013
All-University Policies
Sexual Harrassment Policy 91-53
Advertising by Establishments that Serve Alcohol (new
process)
DRAFT DUE 11/29/2013
Gregory Bard
DRAFT Due 9/29/2014
Non-All-University Policies
Standing Committee Work
Staff Responsible
Task Start
Request Approved by
FS
Results or
Recommendation
Presented to FS
Final
Recommendation
Approved by FS
Professorships Timeline, Application, Marketing Plan
Update Credit Hour Policy
Academic Calendar 2014-2015 & 2015-2016
Sabbatical Recommendations for 2015-16
Professorships Recommendations
Promotion Timeline 2015-2016
Sabbatical Timeline 2014-2015 for 2015-2016
Tenure Timeline 2015-2016
Sabbatical Application Review
University Committee Work
EAC
EAC
Bryan Beamer, PPC
Bryan Beamer, PPC
Bryan Beamer, PPC
Bryan Beamer, PPC
Staff Responsible
Engagement Session - Admission Requirements (new
charge issued 5/28/2014 by Chancellor)
Engagement Session - Emerging Research Institution changed to "Applied Research Institution"
Budget Model Review Committee (102 allocation
model) - Phil Lyons
Elections
All University Promotion Committee
University of Wisconsin - Stout Confidential
Due 05/30/2015
Graduate ceremony on
Friday night?
Task Start
Progress Report DUE
to SPG January 2015
Request Approved by
FS
DUE May 22, 2015
Charged to Provost
Forrest Schultz &
Stephen Salm
Results or
Recommendation
Presented to FS
DUE 5/16/2014
10/18/2013
DUE 12/30/2013
Confirm Elections
Communicate
Call for Nominations
Needed - Request list
Upcoming Elections
from HR
8/12/2014
8/1/2014
8/29/2014
Page 1
FACULTY SENATE DASHBOARD FOR 2014-2015
Status Indicator Colors: Green (Good) , Yellow (Minor Issues), Red (Major Issues), Gray (Complete), no color (not yet started)
Fall Elections - Professorship, Senators, Standing
Committees & University Committees
Spring Elections - Senators, Standing Committees,
University Committees
Due 9/10/2014
Due 10/1/2014
Due 10/10/2014
Due 11/17/2014
Due 12/5/2014
Due 12/8/2014
Due 12/17/2014
NOTES/LEGEND:
(1) Request dates are typically during FS Executive Meetings, otherwise on regular FS Meeting dates or closest date
(2) Status Indicator Colors: Green (Good), Yellow (Minor Issues), Red (Major Issues), Gray (Complete), no color (not yet started)
(3) Approved All-University policies – policies that either already exist as university policies (on this website: http://www.uwstout.edu/parq/policies-sequential-index.cfm) or policies that the Chancellor has indicated
University of Wisconsin - Stout Confidential
8/29/2014
Page 2
Attachment 11
Attachment 11 - Cont.
Attachment 11 - Cont.