Approved: 11/30/10
EC #10
8-0-0
INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY
FACULTY SENATE
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
November 9, 2010
S. Lamb, A. Anderson, K. Bolinger, J. Conant, R. Dunbar, C. Hoffman, V. Present:
Sheets
Absent:
Ex officio:
Guests:
I.
II.
R. Guell, J. Kuhlman
None
Linda Sperry, Haajira Lansana
Administrative Reports – No administrative reports
Chair Report
Steve Lamb: Professional Evaluation Forum (November 4):
I believe Thursday’s forum for faculty professional evaluations was a success. We received some very good feedback from faculty. The next round of approval will be at the Executive Committee meeting.
I am very appreciative that the provost was able to pull the entire section on
Dismissal, which in my mind was in direct violation of AAUP guidelines. Frankly, it was as if the AAUP guidelines were written for this situation. Whether or not we find it logical is beside the point; we must adhere to the general principles of
AAUP. Many of the faculty concerns at this point have been diminished.
Certainly they have other issues. Some feel that dates need to be changed; others feel dates ought not to be changed. However, there is nothing on the table as controversial as the dismissal section. I do feel that the revisions that are coming forward will be positive. R. Guell has been attempting to record all the objections and somehow insert them into the document for our appraisal.
The officers have also been doing that. V. Sheets wrote the introductory explanation about the purpose of this procedure, which will hopefully appear at the beginning. I think this process is worthwhile.
III. Fifteen Minute Open Discussion
• Rich Schneirov had a concern over our use of the term "obstructionist", feeling we should leave it out, and stated that "After all, a clear case of obstructionism and/or lack of collegiality will manifest itself in a low quality of service, teaching, or research. There are 2 issues that arise here.
1) While many case of obstructionist behavior might well manifest themselves in poor quality in the three areas, it is very possible that it won't have an effect on the faculty member's own productivity, and thus in fact won't show up in his/her teaching, research or service productivity. But it certainly well might have an effect on that of others or in achieving goals formally spelled out by the

department. (Notice by the way that our document, in the section describing service not meeting expectations, refers to ""obviously obstructionist to the progress of colleagues' work.)
2) In its own statement on collegiality (the one Rich sent to us), the
AAUP says on page 2 "Professional misconduct or malfeasance should constitute an independently relevant matter for faculty evaluation." (I don't understand how it is faculty evaluation but inappropriate somehow here). Note the next sentence: "So too should efforts to obstruct the ability of colleagues to carry out their normal functions, to engage in personal attacks, or to violate ethical standards."
I think it is this latter kind of behavior that has us concerned -- but if we can't evaluate it as part of the "faculty evaluation" process, where are we allowed to evaluate it?”
• S. Lamb: Sent alternative language concerning this issue to the Provost, who had no
objection to it.
• Summer Teaching , TIAA-CREF contributions, Clarification still needed.
Review/discussion – Motion is not needed. Clarification will come from
Provost Maynard who will present it to the Board of Trustees. C. Hoffman agreed to review the document, incorporating suggestions, and will send a clean copy of the document to Provost Maynard.

Reaction to Performance Evaluation discussion on November 4
Review/discussion
IV. APPROVAL OF EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 2, 2010 AS
AMENDED
C. Hoffman/K. Bolinger 7-0-0.
V. FAC Replacement for Karen Evans
MOVE TO ACCEPT Dave Nichols as replacement for Karen Evans on Faculty
Affairs Committee. C. Hoffman/V. Sheets 7-0-0
FEBC replacement for Marilyn Sample – Rolland McGiverin (alternate)
MOVE TO ACCEPT Rolland McGiverin as replacement for Marilyn Sample on
FEBC.
VI.
C. Hoffman/V. Sheets 7-0-0.
FAC items: L. Sperry
Amendments to the Constitution and Bylaws as per charges from Exec
All amendments approved on 10-29-10 (4, 0, 0) except for amendment
246.14.5.14 which was approved on 11-5-10 (5, 0, 0).
245.1.4.2 replace “…on petition of 50 voting members…” with “…on petition of 10 percent of the…”
MOTION TO ACCEPT above- stated language revision for 245.1.4.2 “on petition of
10 percent of the…” R. Dunbar/J. Conant 7-0-0.
245.3.3.3 replace
“ Timing of Nomination and Election. Nominations shall close no later than
March 10; the election shall be held before the end of March in each year.
2

0-0 with
“Timing of Nomination and Election. Nominations will normally close the
Friday after the return from Spring Break. The Faculty Senate Chairperson may extend this deadline by one week if there are fewer nominees from a college than there are open seats for that college. The election shall commence within one week after the close of nominations and faculty will be given one week to vote.”
MOTION TO ACCEPT above-stated language revision for 245.3.3.3. V. Sheets/S.
Lamb 7-0-0
245.3.3.6 replace “Election Committee. Superintendence of all aspects of the election process shall be the charge of an Election Committee comprised of a member of the
University Faculty Senate from each college of the University and of the
Secretary of the University Faculty Senate, who shall serve as chairperson?” with
“ Election Committee. Superintendence of all aspects of the election process shall be the charge of the Executive Committee. Physical ballots shall be secured in the Faculty Senate office. Electronic Ballots shall be cast and stored in a manner consistent with maintaining their integrity. The Faculty
Affairs Committee of the Faculty :Senate shall conduct an annual audit of elections to verify that the elections were conducted properly and that the votes were accurately counted.”
After discussion, the following revision was recommended: following each election, it will be the duty of the Secretary of the Senate, working with the
Senate Parliamentarian, to verify that each election was conducted properly and that the votes were accurately counted.
MOTION TO ACCEPT revision for 245.3.3.6 K. Bollinger/R. Dunbar 7-0-0.
245.9.1 1. replace “50 members of the University Faculty.” with “10 percent of the members of the University Faculty.”
MOTION TO ACCEPT above- stated revision for 245.9.1 1. R. Dunbar/V. Sheets 7-
Suggested language revision:
246.14.4.2.2.1 Denial
In such circumstances when the Executive Committee determines that the facts provided by the complainant require additional support, the Executive
Committee may elect to deny the hearing. In such circumstances, the complainant may re-file an amended grievance once.
MOTION TO ACCEPT above-stated language revision for 246.14.4.2.2.1 K.
Bolinger/V. Sheets
7-0-0.
246.14.5 Make potentially plural with an “(s)” in all appropriate cases of the terms
“complainant” and “respondent.”
3

MOTION TO ACCEPT above-stated language revision for 246.14.5 C. Hoffman/A.
Anderson
6-0-0.
246.14.5.6 Role of Faculty Affairs Committee Chairperson. replace “Once the Grievance Committee has been established, the Faculty
Affairs Committee Chairperson will conclude his/her formal involvement in the grievance process by convening an initial meeting of the Grievance
Committee, transmitting the complainant's grievance materials to the
Committee and to the respondent, and transmitting the respondent’s materials to the Committee and to the complainant (see Section 246.14.5.8 of this Bylaw), and informing the complainant and respondent of the
Committee’s membership. The Committee will elect its own Chairperson.” with
“Once the Grievance Committee has been established, the Faculty Affairs
Committee Chairperson will conclude his/her formal involvement in the grievance process by convening an initial meeting of the Grievance
Committee, transmitting the grievance materials of the complainant(s) to the Committee and to the respondent(s), and transmitting the materials of the respondent(s) to the Committee and to the complainant(s) (see Section
246.14.5.8 of this Bylaw), and informing the complainant(s) and respondent(s) of the Committee’s membership. The Committee will elect its own Chairperson.”
MOTION TO ACCEPT above-stated language revisions for 246.14.5.6 K.
Bolinger/R. Dunbar
6-0-0.
246.14.5.14 Case Summation. (This motion was dealt with by FAC on 11-5-10 and passed 5-0-0) replace “The respondent(s) will each have ten (10) minutes to summarize his/her case up to a maximum of thirty (30) minutes. When there is more than one (1) respondent, the respondents may elect to consolidate their allotted time and choose a spokesperson. The complainant will then be allowed ten (10) minutes per respondent up to a maximum of thirty (30) minutes to summarize his/her case.” with
“ The respondent(s) will each have ten (10) minutes to summarize his/her case up to a maximum of thirty (30) minutes. When there is more than one
(1) respondent, the respondents may elect to consolidate their allotted time and choose a spokesperson. The complainant(s) will then be allowed ten
(10) minutes per respondent up to a maximum of thirty (30) minutes to summarize his/her case.
When there is more than one (1) complainant, the complainants may elect to consolidate their allotted time and choose a spokesperson.”
MOTION TO ACCEPT above-stated language revision for 246.14.5.14 C.
Hoffman/R. Dunbar
6-0-0.
246.15.8 (This motion was dealt with by FAC on 10-29-10 and passed 4-0-0)
Insert (s) behind “respondent” and “complainant”
4

MOTION TO ACCEPT above-stated language revision for 246.15.8 R. Dunbar/C.
Hoffman
6-0-0.
Insert 246.14.5.11.1 Multiple Complainants
In grievances involving more than one complainant, each complainant will have ten (10) minutes per respondent up to a maximum of thirty (30) minutes per complainant and up to a maximum of 60 minutes in total to make the case. The Chairperson of the grievance committee will resolve time allocation disputes.
MOTION TO ACCEPT above-stated language for 246.14.5.11.1 R. Dunbar/J.
Conant 6-0-0.
246.14.5.18 add the following text to the end of the section:
When the grievance is against the President, the Chairperson of the Board of
Dunbar 6-0-0.
Trustees will make the final determination.
MOTION TO ACCEPT above-stated language for 246.14.5.18 C. Hoffman/R.
Professional Conduct of Faculty Review/discussion of recommendations from FAC
October 22, 2010
FAC Charge #8: Professional Conduct of Faculty
Review the standards of professional conduct of faculty, enumerate the authority of chairpersons to deal with faculty that fail to conduct themselves in that fashion and consider creating a mechanism by which faculty may be admonished by a faculty body for actions that do not warrant a dismissal hearing but nevertheless require some response. amend
350.2.2 Faculty Personnel Decisions. The chairperson should lead his/her department through difficult and critical decisions involving faculty appointments, non-renewals, promotion and tenure decisions, and awards for meritorious activities. with
350.2.2 Faculty Personnel Decisions. The chairperson should lead his/her department through difficult and critical decisions involving faculty appointments, non-renewals, promotion and tenure decisions, awards for meritorious activities, regular evaluations, and compliance with faculty performance expectations as outlined in section 310 (Faculty Duties and Responsibilities), section 500
(Employment), and section 570 (Personnel Files) of this Handbook.
New Section
350.2.2.1 Ensuring Faculty Perform Their Duties and Responsibilities. The chairperson should ensure that faculty members are aware of their duties and responsibilities and the requirements for employment at Indiana State University.
The chairperson should consult a departmental committee responsible for personnel matters regarding faculty failure to perform in accordance with the Handbook. The committee consulted should not include the faculty member whose performance is in question. After confirming such a failure, the chairperson should work with the
5

faculty member to resolve the matter. If deficient performance recurs, after further consultation with the departmental committee and with this committee’s assent, the chairperson may, in consultation with the departmental committee, write a formal letter of admonishment in which the failure is addressed. The admonished faculty member has the right to submit a formal response to the formal letter of admonishment. The letter of admonishment and the response shall be placed in the faculty member’s personnel file and copies transmitted to the relevant Dean, the
Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs, and the President.
MOTION TO ACCEPT PROPOSED ABOVE-STATED REVISIONS TO 350.2.2.1 K.
Bolinger/A. Anderson 6-0-0
The rest of the agenda items, including sabbaticals, will be discussed at next meeting of the
Executive Committee. Four members of the NCA team will meet with EC members next
Tuesday, November 16, 2010 at 4:00 p.m. in HMSU 227.
Meeting adjourned 4:53 p.m.
6