45th Faculty Senate
April 14, 2011 – 3:30p.m.
Robert C. Voight Faculty Senate Chambers – 325 Graff Main Hall
Vol. 45, No. 12
I. Roll Call.
Present: M. Abler, C. Angell, J, Baggett, J. Bryan, D. Buffton, B. Butterfield, G. Cravins, T. Gendreau, K.
Hoar, J. Holman, K. Hunt, S. Jessee, E. Kraemer, D. Lake, C. Lee, W. Maas, R. Mikat, M. Rott, S. Senger, S.
Shillinger , M. Tollefson, and B. Van Voorhis
Excused: R. LeDocq and M. Leonard
II. Minutes of March 24 FS approved.
III. Reports.
a. Chair (via Vice-Chair Mike Abler):
 Jennifer Schilling will be at a budget hearing on April 25, 1:00-7:00pm. Location TBA.
 Reminder to attend all or part of UWL’s 14th Annual Celebration of Research and
Creativity in Cartwright Center on Friday, April 15.
 The Council of University Librarians has passed a resolution supporting the continued
practice of shared library resources. This comes in response to the possibility of UW
Madison splitting away from UWS.
 The next FS meeting will be held on April 28. The 46th FS will meet first to elect officers,
followed by the 45th FS’s conduction of business. This meeting will include a report
from Committee on Committees and the traditional Cookie Day. All senators are
invited to bring treats to share. The members of the 46th FS will soon be receiving
nomination forms for officers. Senators may nominate one person per office;
nominations are also accepted from the floor.
b. Chancellor (Joe Gow):
 The Badger Partnership is still being debated. UWL is planning for our traditional share
of the full $250 million cut to UWS so that we are prepared regardless of the outcome
of the Badger Partnership proposal.
 UWL Faculty Senate’s lack of support for the resolution in support of the Wisconsin
Idea was noticed in Madison.
 UW Madison’s Academic Freedom amendment to the Unclassified Personnel
Guidelines has been approved by the BOR. UWL FS passed a similar amendment at
its November 18, 2010, meeting, but did not forward it to the BOR (waiting to see
what would happen to the UW Madison amendment). UWL’s amendment will now
be forwarded to BOR.
 Item of Interest: UWS and K-12 cut adds up to over a $1billion cut to education in the
state of Wisconsin.
c. Provost (Kathleen Enz Finken): No Report
d. CFO (Bob Hetzel): No Report
e. Faculty Representative (Becky Ledocq): No Report.
f. Student Association Liaison (Cate Urbos): No Report
IV. New Business.
a. Proposed Graduate Council Bylaw Change – second reading (Dave Koster):
 This is the second reading of the proposed change to the GC bylaws. GC would like
to propose the addition of a 5th bullet to address the need to conduct business
(mostly for international students) during the summer.
5. The Council may conduct business via email. A simple majority of voting membership is required to
conduct official business, not subject to Wisconsin open meeting law.
No Second – Motion Fails.
Motion to approve the GC bylaws as amended at March 24 FS meeting. Motion
Approved.
b. Authorization to Implement the Online BS Degree in Health and Wellness Management (Dan
Duquette & Joe Tiffany):
 This program is a result of the initiative to increase the number of BS degree holders in
the state of Wisconsin and represents a collaboration of four UWS schools and UW
Extension.
 Questions: Faculty will be reallocated within the department to teach courses? UW
Extension is underwriting this program for the first 4 to 5 years (i.e., they are fully
funding it). After the 4/5th year, the program will need to be in the black and selfsupporting. Possible options for instructors: faculty can be reassigned, EOPs or hire
IAS. The department is currently leaning toward hiring IAS and already has
individuals In hiring pool that could qualify. Question about the $100,000 in the
budget for an IAS. The amount is for all campuses – not just one individual. Students
are granted their degree from the school at which they are accepted. All revenue is
spit between the four institutions plus UW Extension – so UWL gets 1/5 of the revenue
regardless of how many students are UWL.
 UCC will need to revisit the program curriculum each time one of the other schools
involved in changes its curriculum.
 Dan is setting up a pre-application process so students will know which school they
should/could go to prior to paying the $100 fee. Dan will be carrying out those
reviews for UWL.
 This program is funded through UW Extension. How is the program affected if
Madison splits? Planning should continue as if the Badger Partnership proposal had
not been introduced.

Motion to approve Auth to Implement the Online BS Degree in Health and Wellness
Management. Motion approved.

Dan will get forward FS a clean copy of the authorization to implement. He has also
suggested that wording be changed to say that accreditation will be sought at a
future date in lieu of the current wording.
c. APR Report – Sport Management (Chia-Chen Yu & Brian Kopp):
 Many suggestions from external reviewers were already being implemented when
APR started their report. SM is not currently seeking accreditation. Last spring UCC
approved a number of changes that were suggested by the external reviewers. The
only question APR had was on assessment – SM does assessment, but a lot was
informal so the program has no formal reports. This is why APR is asking for a 3-year
review – to systematically gather assessment data, analyze and report (or a plan to
report) results. The program has adjusted the curriculum in response to external
reviewers’ input and plans to work on showing tangible results of assessment over
summer and begin to implement in the fall.
 FS Vice-Chair asked the Program Director if she is clear about what APR expects in its
3-year report. The director is clear about what APR expects.
 Motion to accept the APR report for Sport Management. Motion approved
d. IAS CPC Bylaws – first reading (Dave Koster):
 No Discussion.
e. GEAC Bylaws – first reading (Dave Koster):
 Discussion:



f.
1. Where is the line between what GEAC has authority over and the department’s
authority over how assessment is conducted? This committee is not assessing
departments – just looking at the assessment instruments for specified Student
Learning Objectives (SLOs) for GenEd courses. GEAC does have the authority
to reject a departmental assessment instrument for a Gen Ed course and report
this to the Gen Ed committee.
2. Who does this committee report to? As stated in the bylaws, GEAC reports to
the Gen Ed committee. What other FS committees report to another
committee – not FS. None. Is there something in the FS bylaws that states that
all FS standing committees must report directly to FS? No. Suggestion that
GEAC and Gen Ed work in concert like Grad Council and GCC, but both
report directly to FS.
3. A rubric form history that was accepted last year was not changed, but was
rejected by GEAC – with no explanation. This has happened in other
departments. What is to prevent this from happening as the committee
membership changes annually? These incidents were not the result of
committee change – the ad hoc committee membership has not changed in
its 3 years. While the committee has tried to be consistent, it has not been
completely consistent and, in some cases, has approved rubrics as a result of a
time crunch, but did not re-approve them when they were submitted with
more time to analyze them. However, GEAC does try to include explanations.
4. This is still a new committee and is still working through all of the kinks and
details in the system.
5. It is very difficult to write rubrics to assess the style of humanities courses. The
same SLOs are being assessed in all Gen Ed courses – perhaps those with
working rubrics could share ideas with those who are struggling.
6. Perhaps the authority of GEAC should be clearer in 2b. It should be noted that
GEAC has no authority over which courses are Gen Ed, but the do look over
the assessment instrument for Gen Ed courses and reports to Gen Ed if it does
not approve of the instrument.
7. Who is the final authority on how courses are assessed? Gen Ed assesses the
SLOs of Gen Ed courses and GEAC assesses the instrument. In the end UWL has
to report to HLC (our accrediting agency) and they have stated that we need
to improve our assessment of General Education.
8. Gen Ed has discussed that they may not want to assess every Gen Ed course
every two years.
Motion to Amend the Bylaws: Change 2a to read “Ensuring that all General
Education courses being taught are assessed on a cycle determined by the GE
committee”.
Motion to approve amendment. Motion approved.
The second reading will be of the amended version of the bylaw.
Resolution on Flexibilities for UW System Institutions:
 This resolution comes from SEC and addresses the concerns of FS about endorsing
the Wisconsin Idea.
 Motion to approve the resolution. Motion approved.
g. Resolution Concerning the Treatment of William Cronon (Chuck Lee):
 Introduction: This resolution has been brought to FS by Chuck Lee. While the
resolution does include information regarding Cronon, it is really about the broader
issue of Academic Freedom and Open Records. It is not so much a support of
Cronon, but support and affirmation of the ideas. Similar resolutions have been
passed by other UWS Faculty Senates.
 Discussion:

1. The GOP requested all emails from January 1 (shortly after he wrote the piece
for the New York Times). Working with UW Madison and System Legal, Cronon
agreed to supply a portion of the emails requested.
2. What are they looking for? Unknown, but Cronon’s assumption is that they are
looking for violation of use of campus email/equipment for political purposes.
3. What can they do to him? This is also unknown.
4. The broader issue is that he serves as an example – so that others are silenced.
5. There is a similar case in Michigan that occurred after the Cronon case. In
Michigan, they are asking for any emails using the words: Walker, Wisconsin or
Maddow.
6. Perhaps we want to make a more general statement regarding the privacy of
email being the same as paper documents. This would take more
investigation.
7. There is value in making a statement in response to an individual act. We could
also make, more genera statement, later.
8. Is it right for us to say that a legal act is wrong? In addition, we don’t know
exactly why they were asking for the information – it may be political, but it
may not be.
Motion to approve the Resolution. Motion approved.
V. Old Business.
VI. Adjournment at 5:02p.m. Next meeting on April 28.
Respectfully submitted,
Kerrie Hoar