Approved: 04/30/09
30-0-4
FS #9
FACULTY SENATE
APRIL 16, 3:15 p.m.
HMSU DEDE III
Present:
V. Sheets, S.A.M. Anderson, K. Bauserman, S. Brake, M. Brennan, H. Chait, B. Corcoran,
L. Cutter, J. Fine, S. Frey, R. Goldbort, R. Guell, A. Halpern, E. Hampton, C. Hoffman, R.
Johnson, P. Jones, S. Lamb, C. MacDonald, M. Miller, D. Richards, S. Pontius, M. Sample,
T. Sawyer, P. Shon, David Worley, T. Zaher
S. Hoffman (Advocate)
Absent:
T. Allen, N. Corey, N. McEntire, H. Minniear, G. Minty,
C. Montanez, E. Strigas, Debra Worley
Ex officio:
J. Maynard
Deans:
A. Comer, T. Foster, J. Gatrell, T. Sauer
Guests:
E. Kinley, R. Perrin, R. Lotspeich, J. Powers, C. Tillery
I.
Administrative Report (J. Maynard)
a.
Busy productive year. Trying to finish up activities/Strategic Planning.
b.
President continues to monitor budget. Tax revenues will be presented tomorrow.
Should know what the budget is by end of month.
c.
Modifications made to tenure clock, spousal benefit and sick leave policies.
II.
Chair report (V. Sheets)
a.
Constitutional questions: voting continues. Tomorrow morning will close down ballots.
About 50% faculty voted. Please continue to encourage voting (via online SNAP).
b.
2009-2010 Senate met two weeks ago.
Officers: S. Lamb, V. Sheets, S.A.M. Anderson
Executive Committee Members: B. Evans, J. Fine, R. Guell, C. Hoffman, C. Lunce,
C. MacDonald
III.
Memoriams (R. Perrin, Chair of English Dept.)
a.
William Ashbrook
b.
Howard Waltersdorf
By acclamation.
1
IV.
Other Reports:
a.
Kinley - Computer upgrade (passed out handouts). Requested faculty to call him if they
had questions/concerns, or, if they are unable to get help elsewhere.
b.
SGA – no report.
c.
Support Staff Council (R. Torrence)
We raised over $1100 for American Cancer Society with $600 coming from the sale of
tickets for President Bradley’s job for a day.
d.
Special Purpose (S. Hoffman)
Once again I would like to bring the Senate’s attention to the salary levels of special
purpose and part-time temporary faculty. In June 2004 the Board of Trustees approved
a “gradual” salary increase to a floor of $1000 per credit hour. That has been met for
special purpose faculty. Lecturer III staff are near that with $985 per hour, but those at
Lecture I status are far from it at $725 per hour. Those salary levels have been achieved
only through periodic salary increases given to all University employees. Five years is a
long time to wait for a promise to be fulfilled.
e.
Diversity Council (Dr. Josh Powers and Dean Carmen Tillery.) Power Point presentation
included:
1)
Vision/mission and value statement for Council
2)
Members/set up (19 members)
3)
Development of three priorities 1) recruitment (faculty and staff); 2) appeals
process or final step; 3) organizational audit/program review
4)
J. Powers opened floor for advice/questions from members.
5)
R. Guell inquired how grievance process differs from current process. C. Tillery
stated that this was not meant to be a new process, but to clarify the old one.
T. Zaher asked if international students had been surveyed. J. Powers stated
that he hopes more can be better served.
V.
Approval of the Minutes of March 26, 2009 (S. Pontius/C. Hoffman 25-1-0)
VI.
Fifteen Minute Open
a.
A. Halpern – In recent months the issue of faculty workload has received much
attention, particularly as it pertains to the so-called “mandatory 12-hour load.” The
University Handbook states (III-8, Sept . 08) “The normal teaching load will be 12
semester credit hours of course work per semester or 24 semester credit hours per
academic year (or equivalent).” - and further – “A faculty member may be released from
part of or all of the teaching load for research or other professional activities. It is the
responsibility of the department chairperson and the academic dean to equate such
special assignments to the normal teaching load.” Of course the capacity of a chair to
provide such release time depends on resources, such as from adjunct instructional
funds.” S. Lamb continued…What has been proposed and discussed this year is nothing
other than what the Handbook states. Every faculty member teaching less than a 12
hour load must have a significant research agenda or administrative work to justify the
reduced load.
b.
D. Richards - at whose discretion re research agenda? Who decides whether a eserach
agenda is adequate to justify the reduction? S. Lamb -that would be the chairs or
deans of units. There should be a desire/need to look at this accurately.
2
VII.
Information items:
a.
Cancellation of Senate reporting meeting.
b.
Special Senate meeting April 30 (Myers COT, Room 105.) Sheets – several important
issues will be discussed …Foundational Studies, new Gen Ed proposal, Graduate College
name change request, etc. Sheets expressed concern about getting a quorum for a
special meeting and indicated that the special meeting would address only action items.
c.
April 30 will also be the Faculty Awards Banquet.
d.
Arts & Sciences Student Honors awards will be held on May 7.
e.
Sheets – Parking & Traffic – SGA preparations to change employee lots sent to FAC and
Senate. EC did not endorse this nor did Support Staff Council. SGA is holding an
open forum on April 17.
VIII.
New Business
a.
ISU Staffing report (from AAC)
R. Lotspeich presentation on over view of data, summary of trends and moves
interpretation. Should anything be done about data’s main focus?
Discussion/Comments
1.
Incorporate student enrollments in this picture. R. Lotspeich - yes, enrollment
trends should be considered. Enrollment have been down 14%, down 12,000
to 10,500 9-10% drop in students. Don’t see anything on part of EAPs/
Administrators.
2.
Lamb noted that this work is a far superior report by AAC and that he is very
pleased with it. He suggested using the same process to evaluate administrative
units as used for program prioritization.
3.
Casual drift in administration. Too easy to look at drift in faculty, not so easy for
administrative/EAP positions. Faculty numbers down 31% - fear that might be
harmful to University in long run.
4.
Need to look at the nature of departures from University. This may affect its
mission. R. Lotspeich stated that he (report) did not look at nature of
departures. Not aware of how changes occurred. Most analysis of the report
dealt with budgeted positions. There has been a 31% decline in long-term
faculty/junior faculty positions. A question was asked that if people leave, why
are they not replaced? R. Guell noted that he heard from others that president
viewed the University as a “fat” institution, one of fattest he has seen. What are
his (president’s) beliefs? S. Lamb asked the provost for his thoughts on this
(effectiveness of some university departments.)
5.
Provost re program prioritization stated that the administration agreed to look
at all levels of the University as well as those requiring administrative review.
He added that we can’t defend what we don’t know. Need to gather more
information on both administrative areas as well as academia. S. Lamb asked if
the administration is willing to champion this? The provost stated that he didn’t
know and could not speak for the president.
6.
Review of 1985 benchmark – details function and how much the University has
changed.
7.
Comparison to other universities. R. Lotspeich – that would be difficult
comparing, are they wrong or are we wrong? Need to look internally. Focus is
on budgeted positions because they are reflective of leadership. T. Sawyer
stated “that depends on when the snapshot was taken. “
3
Motion: C. Hoffman/S. Lamb - To accept with thanks. (25-1-0.)
b.
Administrative prioritization recommendation (from FEBC, approved by EC)
FEBC forwarded the following:
The Faculty of Indiana State University request that the President, in cooperation with the
Faculty Senate and Support Staff Council, charge a group of administrators, faculty, and support
staff to conduct an open and transparent review and prioritization of all administrative
areas/functions performed on campus.
1)
2).
3)
Assumptions – is this information gathering? Sheets – there are questions if we
should be serving students in some areas – need to justify costs and internal
functions.
Chait asked for clarification re Senate being involved in what is going on in
Facilities Management/Power Plant. R. Guell – faculty in relation to personnel
and budget/curriculum administration functions - must provide input.
S. Lamb noted faculty do their best to support efficiency in academic
programming. It is not unreasonable to examine a program’s efficiency and
eliminate those not beneficial to the University. This has to be done seriously
and endorsed. R. Guell stated that he would like to offer a friendly
amendment, “and that a report be delivered to the Faculty Senate by March 1,
2010”.
Motion: R. Guell/Zaher 24-2-0 as amended.
c.
Spousal Tuition Benefit (from FEBC)
1.
Will go to next Board of Trustees meeting (May 8). Best proposal we have at
present time. Are same-sex partners defined? Yes, Senate identified when
added to health benefits.
Motion: S.Lamb/R. Guell 26-0-0.
d.
Tenure Clock Extension change (from FAC)
1.
EC made suggestion to change “elect” to “request”.
2.
R. Guell – language in Handbook makes this a faculty right. FAC liked “elect”
instead of “request” because it established this faculty right.
Friendly amendment to change back to “elect” by acclamation. Motion to
accept: (Guell/Hoffman)
3..
Lamb – Handbook definition did not fit. I am apprehensive about “elect” and
not “request”.
4.
M. Sample – Did committee consider death of parent? It was discussed.
Covered under “immediate family” or exceptional circumstances.
5.
Sheets asked we table this….Needs more discussion and about to lose a
quorum. EC will revisit this issue and bring revision back.
Moved to table: (S. Pontius/D. Richards) by acclamation.
Quorum was lost.
4
Sheets shared status of University Benefits Committees (UBC) and Voluntary Sick
Leave Transfer Recommendations (VSLT). (Note: These should not have been “action”
items – what was sent was not “final policy language,” but only sent for opportunity for
input on advisory matter.)
e.
University Benefits Committee (FEBC and EC identified recommendations to forward))
1.
Request two retirees (one faculty, one staff)
2.
Request chair of FEBC sit as ex officio member.
3.
This group be limited to health benefit issues. FEBC should give input to
group. S. Lamb – don’t want to diminish faculty governance input.
f.
Voluntary Sick Leave Transfer
1.
FEBC and EC suggested minor changes, the most major being to allow a
maximum of 8 weeks of donated time per year. Supervisors could not donate to
subordinates, nor could subordinates donate to supervisors but perhaps
donations could be anonymous.
2.
R. Guell asked how the work is supposed to get done while people are out on
sick leave for an extended amount of time. J. Maynard – people in
administrative offices can share work (we are only talking about a handful of
cases a year.) Guell stated that we are talking about real money to cover long
term issues.
Meeting adjourned 5:40 p.m.
5