ITHACA COLLEGE
FACULTY COUNCIL MINUTES
December 4, 2001
Present: Jim Aguiar, Lee Bailey, Diane Birr, Joseph Cheng, Carole Dennis, Charis
Dimaras, Harold Emery, Marie Garland, Cathe Gordon, Ron Jude, Ari Kissiloff, Don
Lifton, Marian MacCurdy, Winnie Mauser, Tim Nord, Steve Peterson, Mary Ann
Rishel, John Rosenthal, Stan Seltzer, Bruce Smith, Jennifer Strickland
Excused: Robert Sullivan, John Wolohan
Absent: Sabatino Maglione
Guests: Jennifer Blanco '03, Brenna Corbett '03, Frank Darrow, Steve Mauk, Jenna
Perkins '03, Bill Scoones, Michelle Theis '05
1. Welcome and Announcements
S. Seltzer, Chair, opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. He noted that the Sasaki Associates
representatives are still on campus and will be making two presentations the following
day. He encouraged people to attend the presentations and comment on matters of
interest.
One of the four Provost finalists has already been on campus. The next three will have
visited by the end of the next week. Stan encouraged people to attend the open faculty
meetings and open community meetings to get acquainted with the finalists.
President Williams has responded to Council's October 2nd resolution on "surplus"
funds at the end of the budget year; she does not agree with the strategy proposed.
Faculty Council may revisit this subject at a later time after more pressing matters are
addressed.
He noted the November 18 passing of President Williams' mother, Carol Ryan. Gifts
may be made to a Scholarship Fund at Plattsburg State. J. Aguiar will collect and
assemble donations to present as a group gift.
2. Report from Frank Darrow (Online Registration Working Group)
Frank Darrow indicated that he serves as a faculty representative to the Online
Registration Working Group, mostly to monitor proceedings and to alert faculty to
items of concern. Others on the committee include four representatives from the
Registrar's Office, three from Information Technology, and three Associate Deans.
They meet every Friday to discuss how the system is working and how to get it to
meet Ithaca College's objectives. The program is a new product of which we are early
consumers. The initial problem of performance — slowness, crashing, etc. —
occupied major time of the implementation people. Those initial problems have
largely been resolved and the system worked pretty well this last time. Because the
software is a product, as a word processing program is a product, we cannot make
changes unless the provider is willing to make changes and create a new release of the
product. The committee has the conviction, however, that the system can do what we
want it to do, although there are some remaining issues, such as waiting lists and
demand tallies, that were given up in going from batch processing to real-time
processing. The system can respond if we know the right questions to ask. There are
policy decisions and questions of processing to be determined. He believes that the
presence of a faculty member on the committee is vital and important. There have
been several times he has detected potential impacts on academic policies that would
arise from implementation issues, and this is he was appointed.
A. Kissiloff raised concern about students not having to talk with an advisor and then
having to request a waiver from the Dean in order to graduate. His early
understanding was that students would still have to see an advisor before registering.
Frank said the system is certainly capable of blocking registration for students who
have not met some requirement, but that a policy decision was made by a committee
of Deans chaired by Tanya Saunders declining the implementation of an institutional
requirement for adviser permission. Highly structured majors do not need regular
adviser guidance. H&S, on the other hand, might find it valuable. If any school or
department, through some appropriate mechanism, can decide there needs to be some
sign-off before registration, the system can support that policy by requiring a PIN
number, for instance.
Citing a serious problem which arose when a student registered without seeing her
advisor, M. MacCurdy argued that the role of the advisor in the pre-registration
process is an academic issue which should be dealt with by the faculty. She believes it
needs to go before APC: it needs to be vetted appropriately. She further stated that
capturing demand tallies is also a major need. Not being able to capture demand
tallies has made it very difficult for chairs, who need this information in order to plan
effectively. Frank agreed that it is a large issue, but said that up until now
performance issues have occupied most of the time of the implementors.
3. Automatic External Defibrillator Commitment Statement
The Chair sought a vote of approval for the Ithaca College Automatic External
Defibrillator Commitment Statement. He noted a one-time cost of $45,000 for
acquisition of the equipment (roughly sixteen units to be deployed throughout the
College.)
MOTION: To approve the Ithaca College Automatic External Defibrillator
Commitment Statement as presented in ATTACHMENT 01-12-A.
The motion was approved unanimously.
4. Motions on Faculty Handbook [ATTACHMENT 01-12-B]
The Chair reported that the Faculty Handbook Amendment Committee has been
accepting the recommendations emanating from Faculty Council. He brought four
more motions from the Executive Committee to a vote.
MOTION 1: Faculty Council recommends approval of Section 4.6.1 Academic
Workload [on p. 11], as proposed by the Faculty Handbook Amendment
Committee, including as the opening sentence A full faculty workload at the
College consists of teaching, scholarship/professional activity, service, academic
advising, and other responsibilities or activities as determined by the planning
unit/department.
Motion 1 was approved.
MOTION 2: Faculty Council recommends changing the title of Section 4.7 [on p.
12] to Institutional Policies Pertaining to Faculty Conduct.
Motion 2 was approved.
MOTION 3: Faculty Council recommends approval of Section 4.13.1.1 Criteria
for Promotion and Tenure [on p. 14], as proposed by the Faculty Handbook
Amendment Committee, including as the final sentence (line 34) However, faculty
who have held non-tenure-eligible notice appointments in a school at Ithaca College,
and who currently hold a tenure-eligible notice appointment (without interruption)
are eligible for promotion under the same rules which would have applied had they
continued in non-tenure-eligible notice appointments.
MOTION 3 was approved.
MOTION: J. Rosenthal moved to table the vote on MOTION 4 (Faculty Council
recommends approval of Section 4.15.5 Termination for Medical Reasons [on p.
46], as proposed by the Faculty Handbook Amendment Committee} until there is
further information clarifying the proposal.
The motion was tabled.
The Chair reported continuing conversations on the status of Section 4.7.3 Plagiarism
[on p. 13]. Nancy Pringle has recommended changing the sentence beginning on line
5, Any discovery of suspected plagiarism should be reported ... to Any discovery of
plagiarism must be reported ... "Should" has very little legal force; "must" is legally
binding, an obligation. By dropping the word "suspected" in order for there to be an
obligation you need to have evidence, not merely suspicion. There is no need to
reference indemnification in this section; the language in Section 4.4.2
Indemnification is clear enough, particularly if the language is "must." Following
some discussion, it was decided not to make a recommendation until Nancy Pringle
will be present (hopefully in January).
5. Provost/VPAA and Tenure
D. Lifton, a member of the Provost Search Committee, reported on the campus visit of
the first candidate. He informed the group of the procedures and timetable being
followed and noted that President Williams would value the possibility of tenure as an
instrument to use in the negotiation with the chosen candidate.
The Chair called attention to a communication from Nancy Pringle [ATTACHMENT
01-12-C] recommending language for inclusion in the Faculty Handbook, and a list of
procedures which would reside in the Provost's Office.
Following discussion of several scenarios and some concerns with language, the
following motion was made by M. Garland and seconded by C. Gordon. After further
discussion, W. Mauser called the question, which was seconded and approved.
MOTION: Faculty Council endorses insertion of the following paragraph as a
third paragraph of section 2.8 (current handbook) or as Section 4.3.5 (proposed
amended handbook):
A candidate for the position of Provost and Vice-President for Academic Affairs
who has earned and been granted tenure as a faculty member in an academic
department of an accredited college or university, may be granted tenure by the
Board of Trustees upon the recommendation of the relevant department tenure
and promotion committee and the president in accordance with the procedures
outlined in the "Tenure Procedures for Provost Candidates" as found on file in
the Provost's Office.
In addition, Faculty Council also approves the language recommended for
"Tenure Procedures for Provost Candidates" with the two amendments
indicated in italics in paragraph No. 2:
1. The department in which the candidate seeks tenure will review the
candidate's academic credentials and will recommend to the President both
acceptance of the candidate as a tenured member of the department and the
academic rank to be granted. A copy of the recommendation will be provided to
the Dean and the All-College Tenure and Promotion Committee for information
only.
2. The tenured faculty position held by the Provost and Vice-Provost for
Academic Affairs shall be a regular position in the appropriate department but
shall not be included in the budget for the department or be charged for budget
purposes against the academic department/planning unit nor shall the position be
a factor in determining the size of the department for purposes relating to the
release or tenuring of other members of the department as long as the person is
employed by Ithaca College.
3. If the tenured Provost and Vice-President for Academic Affairs returns to fulltime faculty status the individual's salary will be pro-rated in accordance with
the terms stipulated at the time of the individual's initial hire.
The motion passed.
6. TIAA-CREF Proposal
A proposal for increasing the College's contribution to employee TIAA-CREF
retirement plans was distributed at the November meeting. As a matter of information,
S. Seltzer indicated that the cost of implementing this policy, if phased in over two
years, would be about $450,000 for the first year, and $900,000 each year
subsequently. J. Rosenthal made, and H. Emery seconded, a motion:
MOTION: Faculty Council endorses the proposal to increase the College's
contribution to the TIAA-CREF retirement plan as outlined by the Joint Benefits
Committee in the Proposal for TIAA-CREF dated 11/07/01.
The motion was approved.
7. Provost's Report
With no pressing issues to discuss, W. Scoones made no report due to the demanding
nature of the rest of the evening's agenda. He solicited questions from the assembly.
W. Mauser inquired about the status of the issue of sabbatic leave for non-tenureeligible faculty. The Provost said it had been discussed at the last Dean's meeting.
Eligibility would likely be every ten years. Language is not finalized.
M. MacCurdy asked when budget information might be available to assist in
departmental planning. Final requests are due by December 13, to be followed by a
series of Budget Committee meetings. He believes it will probably not be ready until
early January. D. Lifton commented that the Budget Committee has been most willing
to consider faculty concerns; there is a strong spirit of cooperation.
J. Aguiar inquired about the percentage of faculty requests for sabbatical leave that are
granted. The Provost said the percentage is high, probably 85-90 per cent. J. Aguiar
commented that it should not be referred to as a benefit, which would infer universal
availability, but an opportunity for privilege. He asked what the situation would be if
an NTE candidate was denied leave — would he or she have to wait another ten
years? The Provost replied no, the person would not have to wait 10 years to reapply.
Regarding Professional Leaves for NTE faculty, the Provost reported that there are
about 50 NTE positions, which would mean an average of about five leaves per year.
A further thought — professional leaves might only be given to people who have
achieved the rank of associate professor. Leaves would be granted, then, only to
NTE's who have the rank of associate professor. That would clearly reduce the
number of people eligible. There are about four or five clinical people at that rank at
present.
8. Approval of the Minutes of November 13, 2001
M .Garland moved to approve the minutes of the last meeting. J. Aguiar seconded the
motion. The minutes of November 13, 2001 were approved.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.