Governance Council
Monday, November 9, 2015
2:45 PM
UNH 306
Jim Collins, Chair
Minutes
PRESENT:
Collins, Jim; Gulatee, Yenisel; Janiszewski, Caitlin; Kearney, Ann; Kressner, Ilka;
Malavasic, Jolene; Moore, Chris; Reinhold, Karin; Dutta, Suarav
The meeting convened at 2:45 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of October 12, 2015 were unanimously approved.
CHAIR’S REPORT
Since GOV met on October 12th, Chair Collins reported, he had been busy with agenda items including
finding out more information on charter amendments for CAA and UAC and inquiring about and checking
Senate documents regarding requirements for posting items on the Senate website. Chair Collins added that
he had attended meetings with Chair Fox and UUP leadership regarding the UUP ombudsperson proposal
submitted to the Senate. He had also attended meetings with Senate leadership and with Provost Stellar and
chief o Chief Officer Wirkkula. At that last meeting, the Senate officers articulated a major difference in
understanding between representation and consultation. They asked, for instance, who was on such groups
as the grants application team, the ALS affiliation strategic working team, the development of the College
of Engineering and Applied Science group, and strategic planning and grants planning process teams. The
administration understands consultation as having 1 or 2 faculty members on these groups. However, since
the Senate represents with faculty, formal consultation, faculty representatives need to be approved by the
Senate and understand that they serve as the Senate’s designees on such planning and review groups. Senate
officers will continue to take this issue of valid consultation to the administration. We have apprised the
administration that we did not think there was formal consultation around the last set of strategic planning
and have been told that there will be in the next. There will be discussions about administrative review as
we make an effort to reestablish governance input. GOV will have ongoing work regarding this public
engagement piece, which also includes concern with student representation.
At the Senate Executive meeting on November 2 GOV was alerted to a couple of things that fall under our
purview, including the UUP proposal (which GOV along with CPCAA are were charged with looking at)
and with nominations for the Engaged Scholarship working group.
GOV members were asked to review relevant documents that Chair Collins had shared regarding
administrative review. It was noted that Senate Chair Fox had stressed the importance of education about
the administration administrative review issues preceding any possible Senate efforts and action.
Committee Reports
Assessment – Karen Reinhold, Chair
We met once, Chair Reinhold reported, and then started work online. The Committee is not clear on how
to proceed and so I had a conversation with Joe Bloom last week. He asked why we need to assess every 2
years instead of 3 or more like other areas. The deeper problem is that there was a very low rate of response
to the previous survey. Joel Bloom stated that this is not the only way to do assessments. We are mandated
to do some form of assessment every 2 years. Perhaps our system could alternate methods, for instance
including a survey, focus group, or town hall meeting. Suggestions were welcomed, which included sending
a survey only to those who have served in the Senate and using a branched questionnaire. Chair Reinhold
would follow up with Joe Bloom and gather more information before discussing options and timelines with
the committee.
CARE: Council on Administrative Review & Evaluation [John Schmidt, visitor]
Chair Collins explained that guest Senator John Schmidt of from the Biology Department had been steeped
in the process of administrative evaluation. Chair Collins provided an overview of the history, strategies
and relevant documents and summarize that there are various reasons to take the subject seriously at the
University at Albany.
Senators Schmidt gave a brief background on what had happened in 2012 to 2013 as follows: We had been
working with President George Phillips Senator Schmidt recalled in coordination with Bruce Szelest. Then
President Jones came to U Albany in January 2013. Jones had a lot of experience in Minnesota with faculty
evaluation, and ran a computer-based evaluation with Dean Wulfert and CAS, so the issue of faculty’s role
in the review of administration was put on the back burner. In the meantime the AAUP survey ran about 1
1/2 years ago. The 2104 University at Albany Senate survey was modeled on the AAUP survey. However,
the proposed survey was dramatically altered through talks with Chief of Staff Leanne Wirkkula, and had
quite a different thrust. The survey did turn up some valuable information and in part led to the Bylaw
amendment removing Senate voting rights from Ex Officio Administrators. Senator Schmidt noted that
Binghamton and Stony Brook Senates routinely run these surveys and are provided a budget to do so in
order that the President does not have to ask IT.
GOV members were in agreement that this is an important issue. Chair Collins asked that the GOV members
take the issue back to constituents for feedback to help initiate a two-way conversation. Chair Collins
proposed that is important to begin to educate the Senate and constituents so that people will be oriented
and sensitive to the topic. Chair Collins would provide background information, along with GOV's
determination in his Senate report.
Liaisons – Yenisel Gulatee, Chair
The subcommittee met. We are going to try to accomplish the following the semester:
1. Clarify the role of the Senate to establish who we are and what we stand for. In doing so, that
will help people understand what the limitations are and what the Senate can do for everyone here. We
looked at different Senate websites in the SUNY system. We could use a descriptive statement out of the
Bylaws and connect that to the concepts of shared governance and community.
2. Update the faculty handbook
3. Create a listserv for part-time faculty
4. Expand the relationship of the Senate within and without the University and community. For
instance, we want to establish a fund raiser for the local food bank.
GOV approved of the idea in general and encouraged that the effort to move forward.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
CAA: Academic Program Review Committee
Since we last met, Chair Collins stated, I had 2 exchanges with Jim Mower, CAA Chair. As incoming Chair,
he referred me to Joel Bloom. After 2 weeks Joel Bloom e-mailed a response regarding the faculty
assessment of programs and indicated that they are conducted by individual departments and then
forwarded to Deans. We are concerned about specific programs, and the response to our request for
information received a few days ago was brief. I will post all that information in the shared folder, and we
can decide to say "go ahead and change the language" or not. If you cannot access the folder, please let me
know before the next meeting.
UAC: Appellate Subcommittee on Academic Standing
The charter proposal was being talked about last year. However, the chairs of that committee and Kathy
Winchester informed me, when I made inquiries, that they decided to leave well enough alone. It is a big
committee and takes a lot of effort, but it is important and will stay on UAC.
Liaison: Workshop or information session on sustainability as principle in UA undergraduate
education
Chair Collins asked GOV members what would be ways of educating constituents about this issue. They
agreed that the Liaison Chair would ask the Director of Environmental Sustainability to that Council's next
meeting to discuss ways the Senate might support education on this topic, for instance by having an
information session with representatives from UAC, GAC and others.
Senate Website: What must be posted
Chair Collins looked throughout the Charter, Bylaws and Index and also talked with Nancy Lauricella,
Executive Director of University at Albany Community Standards. He found that there are minimum
specifications. We must post minutes, schedules and agendas. There is not a requirement that other items
be posted. Chair Collins interpreted that GOV makes that decision.
On an aside, GOV discussed the possibility of asking that the written reports submitted prior to Senate
meetings be posted on the website and of asking if the Provost and President might also submit written
reports.
GOV members agreed that the names of members of Admissions & Academic Standing and Appellate
Committees would be removed from the website, since anyone involved with either committee would
already be provided with contact information.
NEW BUSINESS
UUP: Proposal for University Ombudsperson
UUP has a standing Academic Concerns Committee. It often happens that at some level in the tenure review
somehow the process has not been right. UUP Chapter President Bret Benjamin presented to the SEC last
week a UUP proposal to have an ombudsperson committed to due process and respect for rights. GOV
discussion on the matter included tenure procedures, how the person would get selected, the possibility of
creating a committee to implement this, and Senate consultation. Chair Collins would send an e-mail around
requesting that 2 to 3 GOV members consider GOV's thoughts on the proposal. Then at the next meeting
GOV could put forward thoughts for responses from President Brett Benjamin or Barry Trachtenberg.
Lastly, the Senate Chair was asked to be the Co-Chair for the Engaged Scholarship Working Group. As
Chair Fox had to decline, Chair Collins would send an e-mail to members requesting suggestions for
nominees for this position. Members would also consider how to identify procedures for generating lists of
individuals who, as part of their responsibilities, would report back to the Senate.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 4: 43 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by
Elisa Lopez, Recorder