MINUTES
Thirty-seventh Faculty Senate
3:15
January 13th, 2011
Shared Conference Room
Administration Building
Richard Fulton, President
Max Fridell, Past President
Jeff Thornsberry, President-elect
Shelly Hiatt, Secretary
Attendance: Richard Fulton, Phillip Lucido, Judy Clark, Tom Spencer, Matt Walker, Carolyn
McCall, Alice Foose, Jim Walker, Martha Breckenridge, George Kegode, Carolyn Johnson,
Jason Offutt, Mike Bellamy, Ryan Wessell (alternate for Psych/Soc), Anthony Olson, Michelle
Nance, Jean Memken, Aaron Johnson, Max Fridell
Guests: Doug Dunham, Rose Viau
Call to Order
The meeting was called to order by Dr. Fulton at 3:16 p.m.
Approval of December 2nd, 2010 Minutes
Motion to approve December minutes by Olson. Second by Walker. Unanimous approval.
Approval of Agenda
Motion to approve agenda by Olson. Second by Spencer. Unanimous approval.
Presentations
There were no recognitions for other presentations.
Reports
Provost, Doug Dunham
Provost Dunham reports that Pres. Jasinski is in Jefferson City, receiving a briefing from the
Governor’s office related to budget issues. The Provost expressed his gratitude to the academic
departments for examining their operations budgets to identify funds that are essential, important
and elective to our activities. In the next week Deans and NLT will meet to discuss the first
round of cuts, based upon this feedback. They are considering cuts at 10, 15, and 20%. Dr.
Dunham emphasized that importance of this as an educational process. It is important for the
administration to be aware of the downstream effects of any cuts that may occur. The Provost
also emphasized the point that if the cut to the higher education appropriation from the state is
not as severe as anticipated, it does not mean that cuts will not need to be made. For example he
pointed to the need for deferred maintenance funding, which currently receives 0% of the budget.
This portion of the budget needs to be addressed for the long term health of the university.
Additionally, strategic planning may require additional funds be shifted to certain areas of
operations. Therefore cuts may not be equal in all areas. He emphasized that the NLT will make
the final decision on this issue.
Question: Why can’t we drastically cut the number of phone lines? We must provide service
and access. It is also affected by an economy of scale. This may be something revisited at a
later date or we could look at other technological changes.
Question: How are commencement speakers selected? This is an informal process that receives
input from the President, Provost, and Deans. Faculty members are welcome to submit
suggestions. It is often difficult to find speakers willing to speak with no compensation other
than lunch.
Questions: There has been some discussion of shrinking the work force through attrition. Can
you elaborator on this? As faculty retire or move on to other positions, those lines will be
evaluated on a case by case basis to identify if they will be renewed in the department. This will
be based largely upon FTE. Environmental Services has already saved significant dollars in this
way.
Question: Have all departments participated in budgeting exercises with regards to potential cuts
in operations? Most departments responded “yes” but a few departments indicated little or no
participation in the process.
Faculty Senate President, Richard Fulton, December activities
 Report to Board of Regents Dec. 17
 Weekly meetings of Organization Success Task Force Committee
 Tree lighting ceremony
 Executive Committee Dec. 9
 Weekly meeting Faculty Evaluation Committee
 Reception Honoring Faculty award recipients, Dec. 10
Organizational Success Task Force Report: Richard Fulton, Member
The TASK FORCE is focused on two strings of activities:
1. The TASK FORCE is part of the process of evaluating Operations Budgets for
potential efficiencies and savings. This process is focused on the short term necessity to meet
the 2012 budget which is expected to produce a reduction from the state of 10-15%. The process
is attempting to not only inspire evaluation of operations on an essential-important-elective scale,
but also to stimulate creative thinking on ways to perform the tasks we need to perform in a more
efficient and effective way.
2. The second string is trying, within the confines of immediate needs but with an eye
towards permanent improvements, to improve and enhance the way we pursue what we do and
how we do it. The TASK FORCE is going to encourage several avenues for everyone at the
university to contribute ideas, suggestions, and insights into these tasks. It wants to stimulate
creative, innovative, cross-area thinking. The search is for ways to enhance our major goal—the
creation of successful students—while preparing the university for the world of the 21st century.
The call is for any and all to participate in this endeavor by contributing thoughtful,
creative, and practical suggestions.
Not all suggestions will be accepted, of course, nor can every piece of input be
specifically responded to, but as the suggestions accumulate it is anticipated that there will be
clusters of suggestions that can be evaluated and tooled for inclusion into a comprehensive plan
of action.
Look for opportunities in the form of a Blog, Survey, Idea Box (using index cards), or direct
emails. Faculty should take this as an opportunity to affect their environment well into the
foreseeable future.
Support Staff Council, Sonny Scadden, no report.
Student Senate, Quentin Templeton, no report
University Chairs Council, Chi Lo Lim, no report.
Academic/Student Affairs, Rose Viau
 Rose Viau called our attention to Bearcat Leadership training on January 28th and 29th.
Committee Reports
Committees Responsible for Matters Involving Faculty Advisement
Access and Accommodations, Lori Durbin, no report
Athletics and Intramural, Robert Dewhirst, no report
Calendar, Merry McDonald, no report
Educational Technology, Nancy Zeliff, no report
Employment Equity, Cindy Kenkel, no report
Health and Safety, James Hickey, no report
International Studies and Programs, Phil Laber, no report
Intercultural Advocacy, Max Fridell, Met on 12-7-2010 at 3:30 p.m. in Brown
Hall. Committee Members in Attendance: Max Fridell, Matt Baker, Serena Euler, George
Kegode, Armin Muhsam, Ildiko Olasz, and Kenton Wilcox. Guests in attendance: Rose Viau,
Jody Throener, and Jeremy Waldeier. Discussion prior to meeting with Dave Oehler.
Items discussed:
1. Student placement in residence halls
2. Foreign language offerings
3. Job description for the director of Intercultural Affairs Office
Student/Faculty Discipline, Daniel Smith, no report
Student/Faculty Traffic, David Vlieger, no report
Research, Stephen Town, no report
Committees Responsible for Matters Requiring Faculty Advisement
Animal Welfare, Karen Schaffer, no report
Assessment, Jenny Rytting,
No meetings since the last Senate meeting, but the committee will be busy
with Five Year Departmental Reviews and participation in the Foundations of
Excellence project, looking at the first year experience.
Budget, Planning and Development, Michelle Nance, at a standstill until a
clearer picture emerges with regard to potential cuts in state appropriations.
Faculty Welfare, Matt Walker,
The Faculty welfare committee will be sending out the Faculty Satisfaction
Survey in late February or early March. They are meeting with Nate Blackford
(Institutional Research) to look for more actionable items.
Institutional Review Board, Terry Long, no report
Committees Responsible for Matters Related to Faculty Sovereignty
Academic Appeals, Judy Clark, no report
Admissions and Advanced Standing, James Walker
The committee has met twice in the past month, hearing 43 petitions, approving
28, and denying 15.
Curriculum and Degree Requirements, Carolyn McCall
Electronic report
Designated Curriculum Matters, Bill Richardson, no report
One Time Course Offering, Jeff Thornsberry, no report
Ad Hoc Committees
Faculty Evaluation Committee, Rich Fulton
This committee continues to work on revising the faculty evaluation. A proposal
will be ready sometime in the Spring 2011 trimester.
Old Business
Discussion of the General Studies Report: A variety of opinions were voiced by various
departments. Some departments indicated that they would rather delay a comprehensive
examination of general education until a later date, due to the large number of issues already in
front of us (budget, first year experience etc.). Dr. Fulton indicated that he was leery of opening
this issue at this time since previous examinations of the general education package became very
contentious. Departments were very protective of their courses due to their importance in
determining faculty lines in their departments. This would be exacerbated in the current budget
environment. Can we justify adding additional courses to the package given our current budget
constraints. Other senators indicated a desire to move forward with a review of general
education since they feel that we do not have a coherent philosophy of general studies. Does
general education provide a broad (liberal) core or is it more applied? Without a coherent
philosophy it makes it difficult to assess whether existing courses are meeting the needs of
general education or how to treat new courses submitted to be part of the package. It was
pointed out that even a discussion of philosophy will be interpreted by some as being hostile to
specific courses.
Dr. Fulton indicated that he would speak with Dr. Richardson (DCM) about moving forward
with a discussion of general education philosophy without getting into the specifics of adding or
eliminating courses.
New Business
Dr. McCall asked about the possibility of holding a campus wide “Red Alert” drill.
Information was shared that indicated that University Police would do this on a building by
building basis.
Motion to adjourn by Olson. Second by Spencer. Meeting adjourned at 4:25 p.m.
NOTE: Read Curriculum Proposals on Faculty Senate web site!
Go to: MyNorthwest. After entering name and password, on the upper right select
“groups”; Faculty Senate is then listed. Click and it will send you to a site where you can
choose “Files” which will get you to the contemporary proposals.
Chairs may want to check this site to make sure their proposals are in the process. They
should have sent a copy of the proposal via internet right after the Dean’s approval. Of
course, the hard copy goes to the next stop on the routing sheet.
VIII. Adjournment
**Major Initiatives for 2010-20?
1) Support for Strategic Planning Initiatives
2) Maintain Faculty Role in State Mandated Initiatives
3) Input into Budget Decisions
4) Faculty Workload
5) Faculty Salary and Benefits in time of Budget Constraints
Dates for Faculty Meetings and Faculty Senate Executive Committee Meetings
FULL FACULTY SENATE MEETINGS
Wednesday, Sept. 1
Wednesday, Oct. 6
Wednesday, Nov. 3
Wednesday, Dec. 1
Wednesday, Jan. 12
Wednesday, Feb. 2
Wednesday, Mar. 2
Wednesday, Apr. 6
FACULTY EXEC COMMITTEE MTGS
Wednesday, Sept 15
Wednesday, Oct. 20
Wednesday, Nov. 17
Wednesday, Dec. 8
Wednesday, Jan. 19
Wednesday, Feb. 16
Wednesday, Mar. 16
Wednesday, Apr. 20
All Faculty Senate meetings begin at 3:15 in Shared Conference Room/Admin. Bldg.
All Executive Committee Meetings begin at 3:15 in Valk 14.
Agenda items should be submitted 10 days in advance of Senate meetings.