UFS #1
Approved September 20, 2001.
August 30, Minutes
Indiana State University
Faculty Senate, 2001-2002
Time: 3:15 p.m.
Place: HMSU, Dede III
Officers: Chairperson J. Cerny, Vice Chair S. Lamb, Secretary C. Hoffman
Senators: John Allen, M. Brennan, D. Burger, G. Christianson, B. Clouse, R. Clouse, N. Corey,
P. Dutta, B. Frank, R. Goidel, V. Gregory, M. Hamm, M. Harmon, P. Hightower, H. Hudson, J.
Jakaitis,R. Johnson, K. Liu, R. McGiverin, J. McNabb, D. Memory, W. Moates, F. Muyumba, T.
Nicoletti, N. Rogers, R. Schneirov, L. Sperry, J. Tenerelli, D. Vesper, E. Warner, W. Warren, C.
Yoder
Absent: E. Bermudez, A. Cockerham, D. Gilman, N. Lawrence, L. Maule
Ex-Officio: President Benjamin, Provost Pontius, Vice President Schafer
Deans: T. Foster, B. Hine, D. Hopkins, J. Kuhlman, J. Maynard, B. Passmore, B. Saucier, T.
Sauer
Visitors: C. Amlaner, B. Dalman, T. Harris
I. Administrative Report
President Benjamin thanked the faculty for attendance at his afternoon opening address and
evening reception on August 24, and noted his upcoming address to the faculty on September 24.
He commented that this would be a year of implementation and that he hoped to move forward
with an ambitious agenda for the institution. He commented on the following topics: budget
projection, Institutional Effectiveness becoming a part of Institutional Research, extending and
defining institutional service, the H-R Dimensions Task Force, and continued review of the
travel policy.
The President reported that overall enrollment is up 3-4%, graduate student enrollment is up
approximately 8% and that he had been attending various meetings with multiple constituencies.
He commended the School of Nursing for its ranking in a recent report in U.S. News and World
Report.
He closed by applauding the new Senate leadership and introducing the new provost, Steve
Pontius, to the Senate.
Provost Pontius commented on his respect for the collaborative form of government enjoyed at
ISU and noted that the faculty deans would be in attendance at Senate meetings; he followed
with introduction of each dean.
The Provost commented that his first agenda item was to complete his leadership team. In this
effort the University intended to utilize outside consultants. He noted the possible
reconfiguration of responsibilities assigned the Dean of Graduate Studies and the Library Dean.
He further commented on a collaborative process regarding the Program Array Review and the
proposed Workload Policy. Other initiatives noted were the timeline for class scheduling,
publication, and revision, Distance Education instructor qualifications, the University's School of
Business ongoing refinement of the agreement with the U.S. Open University and the good
enrollment in the program. The Provost further noted the upcoming meeting of the Indiana
Commission for Higher Education scheduled for September 10.
II. Chair Report
Chair Cerny opened with welcoming remarks. He noted that governance bodies of the College,
schools and Library would be selecting Senate liaisons and encouraged Senators to be available
for this service. He informed the Senate that F. Bell would be the faculty representative on the HR Dimensions Taskforce and noted the Board of Trustees meeting scheduled for September7.
III. SGA Report
SGA President, K. Garing greeted the Senate and made opening remarks.
IV.Fifteen Minute Open Discussion
H. Hudson commented on the inadequate parking due to improper parking within lots.
Chair Cerny noted the letter from the Board of Trustees President, Barbara House, to the
University community and extended his thanks for the communication.
V. Election of Parliamentarian
E. Warner was elected Parliamentarian by acclamation. (Clouse, Tenerelli).
The Parliamentarian gave the following review of parliamentary procedures:
We invite Senators to think through each issue and vote yea (yes) or nay (no), rather than
abstain. We ask for and record the count of abstentions, as the University Faculty Senate has
always done. But an abstention is basically a way of registering a "present." For example, as in a
former case in a faculty vote here at ISU, if two votes were yea, 1 vote was a nay, and there were
13 abstentions, then this was a yes vote, not a no vote. The abstentions only mattered to indicate
the number of faculty in attendance and voting--in order to verify a quorum. "Although it is the
duty of every member who has an opinion to vote" in any official body of which he/she is a
member, he/she may abstain. But such an abstention is not a negative vote. It is often a way of
withholding a vote on a matter of "direct personal interest" or self-interest" (Henry M. Robert III
and William J. Evans, eds., The Scott, Foresman Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised,
Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1990, pp. 402-403.) An ISU Faculty Senate
quorum requirement is two-thirds majority of the body.
Although neither the chair nor the parliamentarian has invoked the following in the past, the
chair has reminded me that usually a member is limited to speaking twice on an issue prior to a
vote--to ensure other members of the body have ample opportunity to express themselves on an
issue as well. In the future, when many Senators wish to speak on an issue, we may have to
enforce this Robert's rule in order to ensure that all who wish to speak on a matter before the
body have time to do so.
We would like to remind faculty that we have a requirement of no one voting twice, and thereby
possessing a "double jeopardy" opportunity of voting twice, for or against a faculty member on
two or more separate committees dealing with matters of promotion and tenure. If a department
is so small that all of its tenured, promoted faculty members are on all tenure-promotion
decisions, then that department's representative should exempt himself/herself from speaking
and/or voting again on a given faculty member on another committee at a higher level.
Anyone having a lengthy statement to be made in the Fifteen Minute Open Discussion period
should please write the statement out and give it the Senate secretary, and then abbreviate the
statement in its oral presentation to the Senate. This would save valuable time for other members
to make statements of their own in the Fifteen Minute Open Period. This would help us to
efficiently conduct our business and still have adequate opportunity to democratically explicate
concerns and matters of importance to Senators.
Thank you.
Chair Cerny said he would not vote except in cases of a tie.
VI. Confirmation of Standing Committees
Chair Cerny noted modifications made by the Executive Committee to the slates.
Approved as amended. (Clouse, Muyumba 34-0-1).
VII. All University Committee Recommendations
Chair Cerny noted modifications made by the Executive Committee.
Approved as amended. (Hightower, Hudson 34-0-1).
The meeting adjourned at 4:18 p.m.