Faculty Senate
Meeting of May 8, 2014
Robert C. Voight Faculty Senate Chambers – 325 Graff Main Hall
Vol. 48, No. 15
I.
II.
III.
IV.
Roll Call – Present: M. Allen, J. Anderson, C. Angell, E. Barnes, K. Beyer, L. Caya, M. G. Cravins,
Current, L. Dickmeyer, N. Eschenbaum, A. Galbraith, D. Hart, K. Hoar, J. Hollenback, J. Kirsch, F.
Klein, R. McKelley, D. Riley, K. Rosacker, B. Seebach, J. Shanks, B. Shrestha, K. Terpstra.
Excused: P. Haried
Approval of Minutes – the minutes of the May 1, 2014 meeting were approved as distributed.
Reports:
A. Provost/Vice Chancellor – Heidi Macpherson.
1. April 11-12th of 2016 for the HLC visit.
2. ICOM and Web Migration will go live on June 2, 2014.
3. Task force on community access of UW-L computers recommendation will be
presented to the Senate during the Fall of 2014.
4. Final Exam policy is a Faculty Senate policy. As a result faculty are encouraged
to follow the policy.
5. Enrollment Services is collecting data from the UW-L community. Thanks for
your participation.
B. CFO – Bob Hetzel.
1. UW System has authorized funds to renovate the Annett Recital Hall in the
Center for the Arts.
C. Faculty Representative – George Cravins.
1. Update regarding UW-System funding.
2. 12-month pay plan is making progress.
3. 30-credit transfer mandate by the Legislator has released a report. This is a
complex issue which will require careful monitoring.
D. Faculty Senate Chair – Anne Galbraith.
1. Thank you to all Senators for your active involvement in the 48th senate.
Academic Technology Committee (ATC) recommendation on retaining SEI information.
A. The AT Committee offers the following evaluation definition and data retention
recommendation:
Evaluation Definition:
The official UW-L Student Evaluation of Instruction is comprised of the following six questions.
1. I was looking forward to taking this course.
2. The instructor was helpful to students.
3. The instructor was well prepared.
4. The instructor communicated the subject matter clearly.
5. I learned a great deal from this instructor.
6. Overall, this instructor was excellent.
These data will be collected for any instructor of a course in accordance with the guidelines
adopted by Faculty Senate. Data for these questions will be maintained by ITS pursuant to the
University Data Retention Policy.
Data Retention for Non-University Required Questions:
ITS will continue to generate reports summarizing the data collected for department and/or
individual questions. ITS will maintain raw data for these non-university required questions until
the first of June in the calendar year following the current academic year (for the 2012-2013
academic year, data would be deleted on June 1st 2014). At this time, both the raw data and
summaries will be deleted from ITS-maintained databases. It is the responsibility of the
department or the individual faculty to preserve these data in accordance with the appropriate
UW-System Record Retention Schedule(s).
B. Four options regarding data retention were offered. The ATC and SEC recommend option
#4 which is a hybrid of options 2 and 3.
Option 4: Hybrid retention (faculty and student data are divorced)
Individual evaluations are kept until the first of June in the calendar year following the current
academic year.
On June first the following will happen.
1. Faculty summary data are regenerated – allows any corrections due to misprocessing of
data by ITS (applicable predominately to paper SEIs). WINGS will maintain a class by
class SEI record for each faculty consisting of the fractional median score for each of the
six university questions.
2. Student summary data are generated. WINGS will maintain a term by term SEI record
for each student for each of the six university questions. Courses will be randomized for
each question within each term. No course identifiable information will be maintained.
For terms where only one course is taken no record will be maintained.
Retention of data:
Faculty summary data will be retained as per the Records Schedule, with IAS treated like
probationary faculty (see Appendix A below)).
Student summary data will be retained as per the Records Schedule.
M/S/P to approve the committee recommendations (with option #4).
V.
Articles & By-laws Committee recommendations – first reading
Dan Duquette, Chair of the Articles & By-laws Committee presented the following proposed
changes:
A. Addition to Senate Policy IV.A.4 Responsibilities of Departments, Department Members
and Department Chairpersons. Replace last sentence with the following:
Departments will determine how courses offered through the department are to be
delivered (e.g., face-to-face, hybrid, online).
M/S/P to approve. (unanimous voice vote)
B. Addition to Articles of Faculty Organization (I.B.4.)
All Instructional Academic Staff, as well as those with split appointments who have chosen
Faculty Senate as their governing body, are granted faculty status (UWS 1.05) at the time of
hire.
M/S/P to approve. (unanimous voice vote)
C. Amend the Academic Program Review Committee bylaws under 2 to read:
Scheduling and conducting, in consultation with the provost/vice chancellor, the audit and
review of academic programs, including the joint (with UW System) review of newly
implemented academic programs.
M/S/P to approve. (unanimous voice vote)
D. Amend the membership paragraph for the Complaints, Grievances, Appeals & Academic
Freedom Committee bylaws to read:
Membership of the committee shall consist of nine tenured faculty members and six
tenured alternates. Committee members and alternates shall be selected for three-yearterms with a third of the committee newly appointed each year. Members and alternates
shall be appointed without regard to membership on other committees. Broad
representation in committee membership shall be maintained with no more than one
member and one alternate appointed from a single department. An The IAS Liaison shall
serve as a non-voting consultant in a case involving an IAS member. The committee shall
elect its chairperson and a secretary to keep an official record of proceedings.
M/S/P to approve. (unanimous voice vote)
E. Amend the membership paragraph for the Hearing Committee bylaws to read:
Membership of the committee shall consist of nine full-time tenured faculty members who
are not department chairpersons. The members shall be chosen by the Committee on
Faculty Committees after all other committees have been chosen regardless of committee
or senate membership. Terms of membership shall be three years, staggered so that three
members retire and are replaced every year. Each member of the committee shall have a
first alternate and a second alternate, chosen for a concurrent term. The alternates will
serve in case of resignation (so as to complete the three-year term) or as a temporary
replacement for a member who is unable to serve or who is disqualified from a hearing
through procedures established by the committee. An The IAS Liaison shall serve as a nonvoting consultant in a case involving an IAS member. The committee shall elect its
chairperson and a secretary to keep an official record of proceedings.
M/S/P to approve. (unanimous voice vote)
F. Amend the Instructional Academic Staff Committee bylaws, as well as the Instructional
Academic Staff Career Progression Committee bylaws to read:
The Instructional Academic Staff Committee
Duties and responsibilities of the committee shall include:
1. Studying, developing, and recommending policies and procedures used in the university
concerning salary, position types and titles, career progression promotion, workload, and
general working conditions for Instructional Academic Staff.
2. Studying, developing, and making recommendations regarding the implementation in the
university of such policies and procedures.
3. Collecting and disseminating information on such policies and procedures and their
implementation in the university.
Membership of the committee shall consist of nine members of the faculty and shall include at
least three representatives from each of the College of Liberal Studies and the College of Science
and Health and two representatives from the College of Business Administration. Committee
membership may include Ranked Faculty but no more than one Ranked Faculty member from
each college. The committee shall elect its chairperson.
The Instructional Academic Staff Career Progression Promotion Committee (IAS-CPC) (Added
2011)
Duties and responsibilities of the committee shall include reviewing career progression
promotion files subject to the following rules of operation:
1. The committee members shall use the general performance and achievement
criteria that are described in the “General Policies, Procedures and Criteria for
Instructional Academic Staff Career Progression Guide to Instructional Academic Staff
Promotion” (the most current version of which is posted on the IAS website
http://www.uwlax.edu/facultysenate/committees/ias/pages/CareerProgressionPromot
ion.html). In addition to teaching, the criteria include service and/or professional
development, creative activity, or scholarship. The committee shall provide guidelines
for the submission of departmental criteria and other data supporting candidacy for
career progression promotion. Following the establishment of rules and procedures
and prior to submission of candidate applications, the IAS Liaison shall hold a meeting
for eligible candidates to describe the career progression promotion process. The
Instructional Academic Staff Career Progression Promotion Committee, via the IAS
Liaison, shall publicize this meeting in the Campus Connection.
The members shall give fair and full consideration to all relevant materials that are
presented on the candidate's behalf. A written unpublished record of the deliberations
shall be maintained. The unpublished records shall be destroyed at termination of the
committee year or after resolution of all appeals.
2. Within seven days of the committee’s decision on a candidate for progression
promotion, the chairperson of the committee shall communicate the decision in writing
to the candidate and to the appropriate department chairperson. A candidate who is
not recommended for progression promotion shall receive the reasons for the negative
decision as part of this written notification.
3. Within 7 days of receiving the written reasons for a negative decision, the candidate
may, by writing to the Instructional Academic Staff Career Progression Promotion
Committee chair, appeal the committee recommendation. An appeal review shall take
place within 14 days of the filing date. The IAS member shall be given at least 7 days
notice of such review. The burden of proof in such an appeal shall be on the IAS
member, and the scope of the review shall be limited to the question of whether the
decision was based in any significant degree upon one or more of the following factors,
with material prejudice to the individual:
a. Conduct, expressions, or beliefs that are constitutionally protected, or protected by
the principles of academic freedom, or
b. Factors proscribed by applicable state or federal law regarding fair employment
practices, or
c. Improper consideration of qualifications for progression promotion. For purposes of
this section, "improper consideration" shall be deemed to have been given to the
qualifications of a IAS member in question if material prejudice resulted because of any
of the following:
i.
ii.
The procedures required by rules of the faculty or board
were not followed, or
Available data bearing materially on the quality of performance were not
considered, or
iii. Unfounded, arbitrary or irrelevant assumptions of fact were made about work or
conduct.
Written notice of the results of the appeal shall be transmitted to the candidate and
appropriate department chair within seven days.
4. The committee shall provide the provost a list of those recommended and not recommended
for career progression promotion, and the results of any appeals. Separate lists shall be
provided for each series title.
Membership of the committee shall consist of 7 members of the faculty selected by the Faculty
Senate to be representative of the colleges/divisions and should include at least one
representative from each college. These members shall be IAS at the Senior Lecturer or
Associate Clinical Associate Professor level (or higher) or tenured ranked faculty at the Associate
Professor level (or higher), with the ultimate goal of IAS holding the majority membership of this
committee.
M/S/P to approve. (unanimous voice vote)
VI.
The Academic Program Review (APR) Committee Reports.
A. Computer Science.
1. Motion to accept the report at distributed – M/S/P.
B. International Business.
1. Motion to accept the report as distributed – M/S/P.
C. APR’s recommendation that an additional member be added during the 2014-2015
Academic year.
M/S/P to allow Bonita Bratina remain on the APR committee for an additional year.
VII. SEC recommendation regarding duties of Director of the School of Education during the 2014-2015
Academic School Year.
M/S/P to approve the following motion from the SEC/Associate Vice Chancellor Hoar:
Until the PTS committee recommendations are approved by the Faculty Senate, the former duties of the
CLS Dean in DES faculty review processes will be performed by the Director of the School of Education.
This includes retention, tenure, promotion, and any other process that traditionally involved the CLS
Dean. To preserve the appeals process, the Director will not submit individual assessments at the
beginning of the review process for DES faculty.
VII.
SoE Representation of Faculty Senate – 2nd reading.
The SEC proposes to convert the 5th CLS seat to an At-Large/SoE seat. This seat can only be held
by SoE faculty/IAS. as defined by Faculty Senate policies Article XII and Human Resources. This
At-Large/SoE Senator must be elected by all faculty/IAS just as other At-Large seats are elected.
SoE faculty/IAS could also run for other At-Large seats.
M/S/P to approve. (Yes-21 , No-1, Abstain-1)
VIII.
Adjournment 5.25 PM
Respectfully Submitted by Kirsten M Rosacker