EC#6
Approved October 16,2007
October 9, Minutes
Indiana State University
Faculty Senate 2007-08
Time: 3:15 p.m.
Place: HMSU, Room 227
Present: Chairperson V. Sheets, Vice Chair A. Halpern, Secretary Sister A. M. Anderson, J.
Fine, J. Hughes, M. Miller, S. Pontius, T. Sawyer, D. Worley
Ex-Officio: R. English
I. Administrative Report:
Provost Maynard is away at a meeting. Areas of focus are funding and completion metrics. A
link will be sent for the ICHE Paper. An aggressive search is going on for an IAC Director.
Sympathy was expressed for the family of Bev Bitzegaio, Technology, over the loss of her son
Kyle.
II. Chair Report:
1. Liaisons are not defined in the handbook, but are designed to promote communication
between the executive committee and standing committees. Liaisons are not active participants
in the committees and do not vote. They are to share (clarify) information to standing committees
and report on the progress of discussions in the standing committees to the Executive Committee
and Senate. Liaisons may speak when invited to the table.
2. Like Steve Lamb & Harriet Hudson, I strongly believe that most of the work of faculty
governance should be done by standing committees. This is not to say that executive committee
should "rubber stamp" all proposals that come forward (In fact, the executive committee is
obligated to review proposals from a broader perspective and should ask different questions than
the standing committees). Nevertheless, the Executive Committee should be wary of
overturning/rejecting the work of lower committees outright. Whenever feasible, items should be
sent back to standing committees when additional considerations are raised; the executive
committee, and especially the Senate, are not the ideal loci for rewriting/reworking of proposals.
3. As reported in the Cyberwire, the Presidential Search Committee has been formed. I
understand that their first meeting will be on October 18th. I am particularly excited to see
Mayor Burke's willingness to serve as a member of this group. This provides a real opportunity
for strengthen ISU's relationship with the Terre Haute community.
4. VP Floyd and I have continued discussing the establishment of a group to examine
"post-retirement health care" and related benefits issues, as per last year's FEBC
recommendations (approved at the August 2007 Senate meeting). I anticipate that the committee
will be convened shortly.
5. The University has decided to purchase the on-line catalog system, ACALOG.
Unfortunately, timing pressures meant that this decision was made prior to AAC's ability to
complete their review and make recommendations, despite their laudable effort to respond within
a compressed time frame. I believe that this was an exceptional circumstance that should not be
over interpreted.
ACALOG does appear to have some advantages over our current pdf on-line catalog, and we all
hope that the decision will be justified by its ease-of-use for prospective students and advisors.
6. In response to last week's Executive Committee meeting, I have a) sent an email to
Melony Sacopulos suggesting that a list of the "missing policies" and "organizational issues" be
provided before any changes to the handbook will be considered, b) sent a memo to appropriate
parties outlining the basis of our decision regarding the MS in computer science proposal and
possible departmental responses.
III. Approval of minutes as amended. (T. Sawyer, S. Pontius) 9-0-0
IV. Discussion on faculty related SGA projects.
i. Continuation of discussions started at the last meeting regarding the SGA’s move to publish
grade distributions for classes greater than 5 individuals or wherein all students made the same
grade.
a. Questions: What procedure was followed to gain approval? Who chose the class size?
Can the class size be increased to 10? How long will information remain online?
b. Noted: SAC and FAC should be involved in faculty related SGA actions. The Office of
Registration and Records is supplying the grade distributions. IT is buying the software.
Collaboration between SGA and faculty would be more constructive.
ii. The SGA has stated a desire to publish SIRs.
a. Questions: Is there a policy? Who has ownership of SIRs? What is the reasoning?
What is public information and what is not? Can SGA move forward without a vote from anyone
else?
b. Noted: SIRs are not universally used or available. SIRs are part of a personnel file.
Care must be taken to protect untenured faculty from having their SIRs made public.
V. Procedural Items
a. Student vote
Discussion was held regarding students voting in the faculty governance process. Three colleges
allow students to vote on committees. FAC determined that this is inconsistent with the faculty
constitution and those colleges whose constitutions stipulate such a practice should be directed to
make the necessary revisions to their documents and submit them for Senate approval. The
Executive Committee affirmed the FAC report. EC vote on 3-13-07 (Halpern, Mulkey 8-0-1)
however Senate did not vote. Motion: reaffirm and send forward to Faculty Senate for a vote.
(Sawyer/Fine 8-0-1)
b. Rules of subcommittee composition - The Grad Council Student Appeals Committee
does not report to the Grad Council. Letters are sent to students from the Chairperson of Student
Appeals. The subcommittee does not set policy. Grad Council is looking for a ruling regarding
administrators sitting on the Student Appeals Committee. Should they be speaking seats only, or
should they have a vote?
c. Coordination of timely communication between CAAC and the Graduate Council. The
two committees should notify each other when they are about to consider a proposal. They
should be considering the proposal within a week or two of each other. There is a need to know
where the process gets held up.
d. There was discussion about the participatory roles of ex officio and liaison members of
university standing committees: who votes, who speaks. The Handbook is not clear on this
subject. Because CAAC consists of 9 faculty and as many as 10 "Administrative" (ex officio), it
is possible for the faculty to be outvoted if ex officio members have the right to vote. A
committee can permit the EC liaison to speak by "inviting to the table."
VI. Fifteen Minute Discussions
1. What will happen with archived e-mail? Will private e-mails be stored in such a way
that a hacker could get access? Anyone who archives e-mail or electronic records is legally
bound to produce an e-mail if asked. Suggestions should be sent to ITAC.
2. There are instances when personally identifiable numbers are used, and show up on,
when using remote printers.
3. Student 991 numbers sometimes appear on student papers. Be careful that no one else
can get their hands on those papers when passing them back to students.
4. ICHE document – Discussion was held on how each institution was framed. Some
Executive members expressed disappointment at the way ISU was characterized in the June
version.
5. Money targeted for fringe benefits was not used for fringe benefits. There were a large
number of vacant positions, and the University was able to hold its medical premium costs below
budget. For those two reasons a lot of money reverted back from fringe benefits, but it all went
back to Capital and Major Repairs. Who makes these sorts of determinations? There is a need for
far more transparency. Those decisions should go through AAC.
6. Has ISU admitted Distance Ed AOP students? If so, this doesn’t seem like a recipe for
success.
VII. Old Business
1. Drop/Add Policy
i. Discussion on the history of the Drop/Add Policy ISU is more liberal than some
other universities. In 2002-2003 most committees looked at the policy to some degree,
though primarily SAC.
ii. Motion: The Executive Committee does not feel the Drop/Add Policy warrants
further discussion at this time. (Halpern/Pontius 9-0-0)
VIII. Committee Reports
1. AAC has met twice on the Presidential Search Committee and Acalog Catalog. The
Acalog purchase was made before the committee completed its work.
2. Grad Council met three times. Graduate faculty status will be coming forward soon.
3. FEBC is looking at the disability policy. Currently one must be at ISU for 20 years.
They are looking at decreasing that to 15 years. No votes have been taken yet.
4. CAAC: communication between CAAC and Grad Council Chairs, changing
department prefixes, complexities of mergers, Gen Ed courses.
5. FAC has met once. Faculty Criminal Background Check has been discussed. The
committee may alternate its meeting days to accommodate schedules.
6. AEC is moving forward on gathering reports from people who have completed their
research but have not filed thorough reports, discussing the possibility of hosting an event,
money has not been received yet.
7. Chair Sheets requested all committee dates and officer names be sent to the Faculty
Senate office.
Meeting adjourned 4:55 PM