Faculty Senate Meeting Minutes
March 12, 2014, 3:10 P.M. Skaggs Building, Room 169
Call to Order
Chair Lodmell called the meeting to order at 3:10 p.m.
Registrar Joe Hickman called roll.
Members Present: B. Allred, L. Ametsbichler, J. Banville, A. Becker, T. Beed B. Borrie, M.
Bowman, S. Bradford, M. Brooke, J. Bunch, J. Carter, T. Crowford, J. DeBoer, S. Galipeau, S.
Gordon, M. Hamon, K. Harris, L. Hart-Paulson, S. Hines, W. Holben, L. Howell, M. Kia, U.
Kamp, H. Kim, A. Kinney, C. Knight, R. LaPier, B. Larson, G. Larson, B. Layton, S. Lodmell,
P.Lukacs, D. MacDonald, M. Mayor, N. McCrady, J. Montauban, M. Raymond, S. Richter, D.
Schuldberg, J. Sears, D. Shepherd, D. Sherman, A. Sondag, S. Stan, A. Szalda-Petree, E.
Uchimoto, N. Vonessen, A. Ware, K. Wu,
Members Excused: J. Bardsley, J. Cavanaugh, A. Chatterjee, M. DeGrandpre, D. Erickson, L.
Frey, E. Gagliardi, L. Gillison, L. Gray, M. Horejsi, C. Kirkpatrick, J. Laskin, A. Larson, C.
Palmer, S. Tillerman, K. Zoellner
Members Absent: A. Belcourt, H. Eggert, J. Glendening, K. McKay, S. Shen, K. Swift, T. Van
Alst
Ex-Officio Present: Provost Brown, Interim Associate Provost Lindsay
Minutes: The minutes from February 12th were approved and the meeting began with the UM
Minute.
Committee Report:
ASCRC Chair John DeBoer
 The correction item on the curriculum consent agenda was considered first and approved.
After some discussion the rubric for the Global Leadership Initiative was approved. The criteria
used to grant the rubric were clarified:
o
o
o
o
o
The courses do not fit in any existing rubrics at the campus or MUS level.
The rubric is distinct from existing rubrics.
It offers a unique and attractive opportunity for study that will promote the University.
It is organized around a clear, coherent, and focused area of study.
It will be recognizeable and meaningful outside of the campus environment.
The rubric does not institutionalize the GLI Program. Faculty propose rubrics for courses according
to the content of the course. The rubric will not be owned by GLI. Proposals for rubrics or new
courses within a rubric are reviewed by the Curriculum Committees and then sent to OCHE for
system-wide approval and inclusion in the Common Course Numbering course list. The student FTE
still follows the faculty member. Majors can determine whether to accept GLI courses as fulfilling
electives per the process described in the editorial catalog change procedure.

Revisions to Policy 201.00 Curriculum Review Procedure were approved. The chair’s signature
on curriculum forms indicates there has been an internal review by the department.

The revision to Procedure 201.3.3 Editorial Catalog Changes was also approved. The following
item will no longer require review by Curriculum Committees.
o Revising the list of approved electives within major, minor, option, or certificate
requirements with the consent of the faculty and chairs/directors of affected programs
This addition is intended to maintain the interdisciplinary spirit of crosslisting. These requests
were previously made on program modification forms.
Provost Brown
President Engstrom is in Seattle at the University Foundation Board of Trustees Meeting. The primary
topic is the capital campaign.
Celebrate Academics Event
Next week is the annual Celebrate Academics event. On Wednesday there is a luncheon highlighting
UM students’ achievements. Starting at 12:30 p.m. on Friday there will be a campus conversation on
the future of online programs at UM. A panel discussion with current UM online programs will follow a
virtual keynote presentation by Nancy L. Zimpler, the Chancellor of State University of New York that has
had a lot of success with online programs. The discussion will take place in TODD 203 and 204. Senators
were encouraged to attend.
Searches
Candidates for the Missoula College dean will be on campus shortly after spring break. The Search
Committee for the Davidson Honors College Dean is in the process of Skype interviewing 8-9 candidates.
Wintersession
Comments regarding the Wintersession proposal will be collected until March 27th. These will be
compiled for the President and Provost to consider. Comments are also being collected from staff and
students.
Legislative Update
The MUS Research Initiative is still intact. It seems to have a fair amount of traction. Because of this
the two Vice Presidents for Research and the Deputy Commissioner are in the process of developing a
RFT with specific criteria, so that the minute the initiative is approved the campuses can move quickly.
Since the legislature will want to see results of the new research funding when it convenes again in
2017, there will only be a two-year period to demonstrate any kind of accomplishment. Other items at
the legislature are moving along with the acceptation of the pay plan, which has not yet had hearings.
Unfortunately SB 143 which would allow concealed guns on campus is also moving along.
Questions:
Faculty members in Psychology are concerned about possible changes to winter and summer session.
Many of their students rely on the winter and summer session courses. The concern is that psychology
students’ throughput, retention, and graduation rates will suffer. The Department has been asked to
eliminate its summer offerings Faculty were encouraged to send their concerns to the Provost’s Office
email.
The Provost received a thoughtful correspondence from the Psychology Department Chair. He did not
order the reduction of summer offerings. Any specific recommendations to meet worst case budget
reductions were made by the deans. Contingency planning is required given the uncertainty of the
budget. The College of Humanities and Science’s approach to summer offerings is more deliberate than
others. The Provost already has an appointment scheduled with Dean Comer and Associate Dean
McNulty to discuss the best strategy moving forward.
It seems wintersession could be used for students to engage in community service in in Montana. This
could help change the culture of how Montanans view the University. The Provost is open to this idea
and would like to see it fleshed out in writing. Emphasis on special experience is exactly the kinds of
activities that should take place during wintersession.
This year’s summer schedule compared to last year shows approximately a 40% reduction in lowerdivision courses. Professor Uchimotto is very concerned about the loss of summer offerings. For
example, his son was planning to take two summer courses, and both have been canceled. His son is
now looking into other options including taking online courses from MSU. Perhaps it would be wise to
invest in summer courses to entice students to come to Missoula and perhaps stay. Currently, because
of budget cuts and cuts to summer offerings, there are no introductory language courses being offered
this summer.
Health and Human Performance has also been discussing cutting summer courses because it does not
have a lot of options to reduce the budget. However, cutting summer courses seems like a mistake
since summer courses are an important part of HHP curriculum for many students.
Provost Brown: Budgets are in flux. The Legislature is still in session and the Board of Regents has not
set fees. And we don’t know potential enrollment figures. We have to be prepared for the worse, but it
could be better. Some of the assumptions made used in planning for the worst case scenario include no
growth in new students and the same mix of in-state to out-of-state students. There are also
assumptions made about the pay plan, utilities and, how much to put into the reserve. These details
will need to be worked out. Hopefully, as more information is learned we will be able to add money
back in to budget planning. This approach is being used to avoid additional cuts in the middle of the
year which is what took place the last couple of years.
Provost Brown: Preliminary enrollment projections are very favorable from a budgetary stand point
(more out of state students). The Office of Planning, Budgeting, and Analysis is working on revised
modeling using a different mix of students.
Chemistry students actually are required to take courses during the summer to graduate on time. If the
summer Chemistry options are canceled, the department will likely have to direct students to enroll at
another university to complete their degree on schedule. The Provost has received a communication
from the Chemistry Department outlining the situation.
Is there no way to structure summer courses on an on- demand basis? The Provost and Vice President
Reid are engaged in a conversation about this possibility. This suggestion also came up in a meeting
with the Executive Committee of the Faculty Senate.
Students will start registering for summer courses tomorrow. It is problematic to let students register
for courses and then cancel them.
Has there been any progress regarding equalizing UM’s tuition with MSU? There has not been any
effort on this because the current plan working through the legislature involves a tuition freeze for
resident students. However, if the tuition freeze is off the table, the argument for equalizing tuition is
ready to go.
Both Missoula College and the College of Humanities and Science appeared to have dropped Math 121
and 122 this summer. This could create a gap and cause students to lose a semester in the sequence. It
seems there should be some coordination between the two campuses to assure minimal course
offerings.
If the worst case scenario changes, will it have any impact on summer offerings given registration opens
tomorrow? There can be additions to the curriculum. Some courses can be listed on the schedule but
not open. The budget is really in flux, so it is tough to plan. There will likely be some additions to
summer offerings. It won’t happen by tomorrow, but it will before enrollment is closed. Areas where
students are dependent on summer courses will be addressed. There still could be some drop off in
summer enrollment, but hopefully it won’t be significant.
Associate Provost Nathan Lindsay and Professor Mary Ann Bowman –
Affordable Book Plan / Rafter
A frequently Asked Questions document was disseminated to senators and a brief update on the
Committees process was given. The Committee has been working with Rafter over the past two
months. The proposal sent out is what would be sent to the Board of Regents if the faculty and students
approve. The proposal was discussed at ASUM last night.
The Text Book Affordability Plan involves both Rafter and the Book Store. Professor Bowman first
learned of Rafter in the fall and was fairly skeptical. As a member of the committee, she has been
persuaded of the benefits of the program. It does appear to reduce the price of books for the collective
students. There might be individual students that could find books cheaper. What is compelling in her
view is that the program levels the playing field. Students will not be disadvantaged because they don’t
have money for books because their financial aid money has not yet arrived. This could enhance student
success and therefore support retention. After listening to Rafter respond to questions, she is assured
that UM will not be impacted in a negative way by participating in a pilot program.
The proposal outlines a two-year pilot starting with first-year freshmen. The following year would
include those students and the incoming freshmen. The cost the first semester would be $252.
According to Associate Vice President Sharon O’Hare 1400 students wait for their financial aid and often
have to make a choice between rent, food, or books. Under this plan that would not be the case.
Textbooks would be provided for everyone enrolled in the Rafter plan.
ASUM Vice President Sean McQuillan provided a brief update regarding the ASUM meeting. There was
a productive discussion regarding the affordable book plan. He thinks the plan is a good idea and is right
for campus. The two student members on the committee were the biggest skeptics and they have had
all their questions answered. They support the plan and think it would help students.
Jon Aliri, General Manager and Eamon Fahey, Chief Operating Officer from the UM Bookstore shared
their experience in working through the logistics with Rafter. They brought the idea forward as an
experiment given the magnitude of the increasing textbook cost problem. If this doesn’t work, they will
bring forward another experiment. The Book Store has a lot of data on courses and student book
buying behavior.
There has been a lot of feedback from faculty which helped to develop the proposal. On March 25 and
26 Rafter will be on campus to meet with Faculty, Staff and Students. There will be meetings at
10:00a.m., 12:00p.m., 2:00p.m., and 4:00pm on both days and an additional meeting at 6:00 p.m. on
Thursday. The Committee wants you to come and ask the tough questions. A survey will also be
available for you to provide input in advance of the meetings. The committee hopes there will be a lot
of faculty and student participation at the meetings so that a decision can be made in April regarding
whether or not to move forward with the Affordable Book Plan.
Questions:
Would publishers still provide desk copies under this plan? Publishers are looking at who is leveraging
the secondary market. It is possible that desk copies could be built into the plan. Rafter is currently in
negotiations with publishers.
The cost analysis showed that much of the cost is attributed to general education courses. Looking
across all majors, the majority of students will save money. There will be a few that will pay more.
Faculty are still encouraged to keep the cost down. The software used by faculty to choose their books
will list costs. There should be total transparency regarding the cost for students. Two years from now
an analysis will be done of the actual cost. Faculty may do such a good job of keeping the cost down,
the flat fee could be lowered. The two drivers for the plan are cost (keep it steady) and student
success.
Could opt out be an option? Most Journalism courses do not require text books. So the minority would
be subsidizing the majority. Several journalism students were polled and are currently not paying over
$252 per semester for books, so they would be penalized. The issue with opt-out is that as soon as you
lose the critical mass the cost goes way up. Students have other service fees, such as technology,
transportation, athletic, health services, and campus recreation that are utilized unevenly. Every few
years the Financial Aid Office has to calculate the cost of books and materials. Its last estimate was $700
per semester.
Students may not be happy to see their financial aid reduced by the book fee. Appalachian State has
been using the model since the 1930s. The Schreiner University is using it as a marketing tool.
Northwest Missouri State University School is another example. Faculty can visit these campuses’
websites and contact colleagues to see how things are going.
How will the plan encourage faculty to keep cost down? The proposal builds in guard rails based on
previous experience. They know there will be some variance and this flexibility is built into the model.
Faculty will be able to do a cost comparison when they select textbooks. This transparency should
encourage faculty to consider the cost to students when making their selections.
The cost is figured by credit up to 12 credits. There is a flat fee from 12 – 21 credits, so it actually
encourages students to take more credits.
There is some concern regarding endorsing a company that will be making money from our students’
dollars. When students interact individually with companies to buy books they could be losing money.
Having a collective base enables Rafter to lower the cost. Rafter does get part of the money, but overall
the fee is replacing the current book costs which on average are higher than the plan.
Why couldn’t UM do this? The Bookstore is an independent cooperation and does not have the
capability to do this on its own. The Bookstore is very concerned with minimizing the cost to students
and has negotiated with Rafter to this end. The details and managing the inventory are complex and
the Bookstore simply does not have the financing required.
How many semesters is the price guaranteed? – four semesters. Rafter has said again and again that
they aren’t the cable company that routinely increases rates.
Mostly this is for the students to decide. Will it be put to a binding vote of the students not just ASUM?
This has yet to be determined. It may go to full ballot. However, the plan would not actually impact the
students voting. One possibility would be to run the Pilot for a year and then ask for a student vote.
Often the bookstore cannot find materials because of the international nature, but faculty members are
able to find them at an additional charge to the student. This is a legitimate concern. There should not
be additional charges when students have paid the book fee.
Are there any possibilities for current students to opt in? Current students could experience resentful
demoralization. The Committee has considered several options, but the one presented made the most
sense.
If you have additional questions, please attend the meetings with Rafter or send inquiries to members of
the committee or representatives from the Bookstore.
Professor Andrew Ware- Academic and Alignment Innovation Program
The Task Force assessed current programs and identified 7 challenged by low enrollment or perception
of lack of relevance. Nine programs were identified as most ready for growth. The committee is now
communicating with the chairs, directors, and deans of these programs to identify possible actions. As
soon as this information is compiled, it will be shared with the Provost and President and then with
campus. The list will not be shared without context, as there are often valid reasons for challenges. For
example many graduate programs enrollment is directly related to the number of Teaching Assistants.
A PowerPoint slide showed sample language for challenged programs and programs ready for growth.
Hopefully this information will be available by the end of the month. The Deans have been notified of
where their programs are in terms of being “not ready”, “somewhat ready”, or ”very ready for growth”,
as well as “not challenged”, “somewhat challenged”, or “very challenged”. There are many programs
that fall into the middle categories.
Questions:
There were around 35 faculty that attended the first forum and 15-20 at the second.
Professor Ware: The Taskforce ran into difficulty counting students for interdisciplinary programs. For
many of these the students were counted in other programs. The data from the Office of Planning,
Budgeting and Analysis counted degrees awarded. There is a problem if three programs are claiming
the same students. The Taskforce was made aware of the Biochemistry issue because a member of the
Taskforce was involved with the program. The Taskforce’s final report will include an explanation of
problems related to reliable data and some suggestions with regard to structures that are needed for
ongoing tracking. The data are available online for anyone to review.
The University should be careful that difficulties counting students for interdisciplinary programs don’t
discourage faculty from collaborating on interdisciplinary work, which seems to be the areas where
there are opportunities for growth. Perhaps the Taskforce could recommend structures to promote
interdisciplinary collaboration.
Professor Ware: The Taskforce still has to identify opportunities for expanded online, interdisciplinary
and international activities. There is still a lot of work to do.
It’s important to forecast the impact of the metric in terms of increasing the campuses tendency to
function in silos especially as resources become scarcer. The metrics should be scrutinized carefully in
relation to the interdisciplinary focus of newer programs.
Professor Ware: This is always a challenge. In the assessment process, some schools it is clear that
certain programs are assigned to certain departments, but in others programs are spread across
departments. Some data are collected by department and some by program so you are not always
comparing apples to apples. The question of whether the review is always equitable is hard to say.
This is why a narrative and discussions are necessary to define the context.
Chair’s Report
Drawing for participating in the Evaluation of the Administration
The President’s Box for the January 29th Basketball game was awarded to the departments with the
highest participation rate – Journalism, Mansfield Library, and Social Work.
Names were drawn from the faculty that completed the evaluation of the administration. Professor
Vicki Watson and Professor Kristen Sohlerg received the certificates to local restaurants.
The incentives were provided by the President and Provost. The response rate increased slightly on the
evaluation from 22% to slightly lower than 29%. There is still room for improvement. ECOS has put
together a summary of the evaluation and provided the data and written comments to those evaluated.
The administrators are given the opportunity to meet with ECOS to discuss the evaluations if desired.
The results will be available in the Senate Office for senators to review by appointment prior to the next
meeting. You will be notified.
Faculty Senate Election and Committee Preference
The Faculty Senate ballot will be sent next week. You will also receive a communication asking for your
committee service preference next month. The Research and Creativity Committee needs two members
from the sciences to review proposals for university grants. If a member is not found the Vice President
for Research will be helping with the review. The volunteer will review up to 10 proposals and must be
able to attend a 2 hour review session. Please contact Kari Harris the committee chair.
Board of Regents update
The Center for Children and Workforce Development was approved and there were first readings for the
retitling of Women and Gender Students and the Neuroscience major. Several certificates were also
approved.
Deputy Commissioner Kevin McCrea talked briefly about the Concealed Cary Bill, SB 143. It passed out
of committee on a 11 to 10 vote. Based on voting trends in the House, it will likely be passed by the
House in the coming weeks. Then it would be up to the Governor of whether or not it gets signed into
law. The Faculty Senate as a body could vote on a resolution that the bill not be signed by the
Governor. It is important that the language in such a resolution not alienate some of the more
conservative legislators who we have lobbied to support the University System. On the other hand, we
may want to provide the Governor with support should he consider vetoing the bill. The Executive
Committee of the Faculty Senate would be happy to consider a carefully crafted resolution to be
presented to the Senate at next month’s meeting. It would be important to review the language in the
legislation and provide the Governor with some backing to veto the bill.
The ASUM Lobbyists are not spending time on the bill because it is believed to be a done deal. Any
resolution from the Faculty Senate might consider a joint statement from the students. It was clarified
that if the bill passes faculty would also be able to carry concealed weapons.
The University is supposed to be insulated from the Legislature through the Board of Regents. So this
law could be an overreach by the Legislature. MUS has a firm and unambiguous statement that it is
opposed to the bill. The Board of Regents may take action if it is not vetoed by the Governor.
Good and Welfare
Carly Holman from the American Cancer Society and Sarah Shapiro, A Junior in the Community Health
Program and Chair of Colleges Against Cancer spoke briefly about the upcoming Relay for Life. The
event engages the community for the fight against cancer. It provides the opportunity to remember
loved ones lost, honor cancer survivors and care givers, and fight back against a disease that has taken
too many. Relays for life take place across the globe and are the primary fund raiser for the American
Cancer Society. The Relay for life is on April 10-11, 6pm to 6am. The event is very powerful and brings
people together that have been touched by cancer. Please take a post card and communicate the event
to your students.
UM Conference on Undergraduate Research still needs volunteers to review posters and judging
sessions during the actual conference on April 17th.
The State Science Fair is next Monday and judges are still needed.
Tomorrow is Foreign Language day. There will be many high school students on campus.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 5:00 p.m.