THE PURDUE UNIVERSIT Y NORTH CENTRAL SENA TE
REPORT FROM WEST LAFAYETTE
1 5 F E B RUA RY 2 0 1 3
This report covers to five meetings:
University Senate Faculty Affairs Committee
University Policy Committee
University Senate
University Senate Faculty Affairs Committee
Purdue University Calumet Senate
7 January 2013
16 January 2013
28 January 2013
4 February 2013
6 February 2013
Official minutes (Rawles)
Purdue University Senate
2012/2013 Faculty Affairs Committee
Minutes
Fourth Meeting, Monday, 7 January, 2:30 - 4:00 p.m.
Room 119, Hovde Hall
Present:
Advisors:
Guests:
Absent:
Walid Aref, Alan Beck, J. Stuart Bolton (Vice Chair), Donald Buskirk, Carlos Corvalan, Levon Esters,
David Kemmerer, Michael Levine, Phillip Rawles, Charlene Sullivan (Chair), Yuewern Yih (If your name is
missing from this list, please let Sullivan know. Attendance was not recorded explicitly at the meeting.)
Alysa C. Rollock, Mark J.T. Smith, Beverly Davenport Sypher
Luis Lewin
Not recorded
I. Call to Order
 Professor Charlene Sullivan, Chair, called the meeting to order at 2:45 p.m.
 The November meeting minutes were accepted.
 The agenda for the current meeting was accepted.
II. Subcommittee Reports
 Censure and Dismissal Procedures.
No report. The Chairperson has learned that the case that was described to the Faculty Affairs Committee in Fall
2012 has been settled.
 Faculty Compensation and Benefits.
See below.
III. New Business
 VP Luis Lewin Health Care Strategy Committee
 University expenses on Healthcare (including employee insurance costs – not including co-pays)
o $54 MM in 2000 on Healthcare
o $163 MM in 2013 on Healthcare (147MM in claims – difference is administration)
 Steve Able and Pam Aaltonen to co chair Health Care Strategy Committee
o 1st meeting on 1/16/13
 Short term – increase deductible and co-pay
o In 2010 was 90/10 Purdue/Employee
o By 2014 plan is to move to 80/20 Purdue/Employee
 Annual increase approximately 6-8% annually in total. In 2014, employee premiums may increase by as much as
30 percent to reach the 80-20 mandate from the Board of Trustees.
 Three plans currently
o Co-Pay (most expensive - $90MM)
o PPO
o Choice – Consumer Driven Plan
o Committee may look at a second consumer driven plan
 Largest number of people on the Co-Pay plan are clerical due to cost predictability
 Average cost per person in claims is $11K
o Approximately 39% of employees account for around 67% of claims (due to chronic illnesses)
 Clinic opens on Feb 28, 2013 – open house on Feb 26 & 27
o Outsourced to CHS
o WorkLife group is being consolidated into the clinic – holistic approach
 Cost of healthcare in Lafayette is arbitrarily high due to limited competition
o In many cases the cost of outpatient surgery here is equal to the cost of inpatient surgery in Indianapolis
IV. Old Business
 Clinical Faculty Appointment and Promotion Policy
The new clinical faculty policy document was presented for discussion by Beverly Davenport Sypher. There
has been no university policy prior to this point. There were guidelines, but no policy. The new policy is to
fill that void and clarify the details of the clinical positions on campus.
Nationally about 40% of faculty are non-tenured. Presumably, this number could include clinical, continuous
term, and adjuncts).
Purdue has a 10% campus-wide limit for clinical faculty as a percent of total faculty (including clinical
faculty) .
The review of the document surfaced the need for several minor changes to the document. The review of the
document was cut short as we ran out of time. It has since been determined that the policy document needs
to be presented and vetted more fully with faculty in schools that have a large number of clinical faculty such
as the Veterinary School, and Nursing. Steve Abel had visited with the faculty in Audiology to address the
concerns of that faculty and has incorporated some of those concerns into the document presented to the FAC
in January. From discussions with the clinical faculty in the Vet School, Alan Beck identified the following
concerns (Alan had his discussion with the Vet School clinical faculty on or before January 17 and did not
provide this information at the FAC January 7 meeting):





1. No provision for anything like a sabbatical leave for personal growth
2. Do the work on graduate committees but treated as ‘second class’ citizens, .e.g., cannot view
Plans of Study and have to receive special permission to serve. Note: CF have as much teaching
contact as tenured faculty.
3. They cannot vote on tenure-track faculty
4. They were not included in the COACHE survey
5. Significant differences in benefits
With the adjournment of the meeting, it was agreed that the FAC would continue to discuss the proposed
document. Since the January meeting, more visits to schools with a high number of clinical faculty have
been scheduled. The revised policy document is to be brought back to FAC at its March meeting.
V. Announcements/Items of Interest
The meeting adjourned at 3:35 pm without announcements/Items of Interest.
Respectfully submitted by Phil Rawles.
Edits by Charlene Sullivan as Phil had to leave early.
The Next meeting of the Faculty Affairs Committee will be February 4, 2013 in HOVDE 119 at 2:30.
Official minutes (Teets)
University Policy Committee (UPC)
Meeting Notes for 1/16/2013
(YONG 1009 / 10:30-11:45 a.m.)
In attendance: G. Carter, M. Clauss, R. Costello, J. Dunzinkiewicz, S. Miller, T. Klingerman, C. Ladd, D. Luedtke, A.
Rollock, J. Stefancic, S. Steen, J. Teets,
Discussions on proposed policies:
I.
IV.A.7 - Vehicle Safety Inspections (Transportation Services representatives Carol Cox and Larry Rayburn present)




This is a revision to an existing business office memorandum from 1981. It doesn’t change the requirements, just
being put into new policy template.
Question: Do new vehicle purchases require a safety inspection? Answer: No, should just go through standard checkin process. Used vehicle purchases do need a safety inspection.
Question: Have all business office and maintenance offices on all campuses had an opportunity to review this policy?
Answer: Yes
Each page of policy was reviewed. There were no questions or concerns mentioned during the meeting.
2
II.
VI.A.1 - Status and Privileges of Retired Faculty and Staff, Surviving Spouses/Same Sex Domestic Partners and
Surviving Children (Human Resources representative Trent Klingerman present)
For specific changes suggested to wording/substance of the policy as consensus by the committee, refer to redlined version
of policy. Other questions/discussion listed here.







All HR, libraries, athletics and recreational facilities on all campuses and Card Services on West Lafayette campus
have had opportunity to read and give comments. APSAC, CSSAC and Faculty Compensation and Benefits
Committee were given presentations in Nov/Dec 2012. Question: Were current retirees asked for feedback? Response:
No. Changes won’t affect them, but do see how they could lend perspective to ability to understand policy.
Question: Policy refers to surviving spouses, what if retiree is still living. Does spouse receive any benefits? Answer:
While retiree is living it is the retiree’s benefit and only changes to survivor when the retiree passes away.
Biggest change is elimination of payment toward health insurance for two months. Previously was necessary due to
PERF’s long processing time to begin retirement benefit pay. Processing has been reduced so payment to bridge gap is
no longer needed. Important to communicate that this was a redundant benefit that’s no longer needed and not a takeaway.
Other change is elimination of accrued vacation and sick leave reference in definition of Official Retiree. Reason for
taking it out was because it was almost never used. Consensus of committee discussion was to leave it in with
rationale that it doesn’t cost the university anything to offer it, just because it’s not used doesn’t mean it should be
eliminated – especially in the current economy, could be viewed as a take-away and put university in a bad light.
Question: Since there are some benefits that a non-official retiree may continue (e.g., life insurance), should there be
something in policy referencing options available to them so reader doesn’t assume that whatever is available to an
official retiree is not available to others? Consensus: Exit interview covers what is available after leaving university,
so does not need to be in this policy. This policy is for official retirees.
II.B. Fee Remission – Question: Language that retiree had to be domiciled in Indiana at time of retirement – does that
mean retiree can move out of state after retire and still get remission? Answer: Yes.
II.B. Fee Remission – Question: Language that deceased faculty/staff had to be living in IN at time of death is new –
how does this affect employee who lived in IL? Answer: the way it reads now, they would no longer get fee remission
for dependents. Consensus of committee discussion: Memo C-7 says employee must live in or be paying taxes to IN.
For consistency, should add “or be paying taxes to the state of Indiana” to this policy because that is how it would
have been interpreted prior to this policy being updated. Related Question: Shouldn’t language about eligibility be in
C-7 and C-7 be updated rather than having it in this policy? Answer: No, C-7 grants benefit to employees and this
policy grants benefit to retirees. Eligibility language specific to retirees and their dependents needs to be in this policy.
Additional Items:
I. New policy on Grievances by Postdoctoral Researchers, Graduate Student Personnel, Clinical Residents and Clinical
Interns



Will be sent out to committee by this Friday. Please share with your colleagues for feedback, and bring comments to
February meeting. EPRG will review policy for approval at its February meeting.
Currently, graduate admin/professional staff is covered under the staff grievance policy. Others, such as grad TAs and
RAs, postdocs and interns used to be covered under the academic personnel grievance policy, but when that was
superseded by the faculty grievance policy a couple years ago, they were excluded. This policy brings all these
employees who have unique employment relationships with the university into one grievance policy that addresses
their particular issues and allows them to be reviewed by their peers.
Policy has been shared with VPR, Graduate School, PGSG and Postdoc Association.
II Gratuities policy – we are still taking comments/examples on this topic. Going to be asking Faculty Affairs committee for
examples as well. Will share benchmark with UPC and hope to have draft for UPC in the next couple of months.
III. Volunteer policy – still interim until June 2013. EPRG, HR and VPEC are still working on refining. At this point
academic advisory committees have been given a waiver until the policy is finalized. All others are subject to its
terms. Feel free to provide input on whether there should be other exemptions in the final policy. Trying to focus is
on what these groups are doing and who they are interacting with, not what their status is in the community.
Closing Comments:
I.
II.
III.
No EPRG meeting in January.
Next UPC meeting is February 20, 2013, at 10:30 a.m. in YONG 1009; EPRG meets that afternoon.
3
UNIVERSITY SENATE
Fourth Meeting, Monday, 28 January 2013, 2:30 p.m.
Room 302, Stewart Center
1. Call to order - 2:34 pm
Professor J. Paul Robinson
2. Approval of Minutes of 19 November 2012 – approved unanimously
3. Acceptance of Agenda – approved unanimously
4. Remarks by the President
President Mitch Daniels
President Daniels commented on the Senators’ attire and indicated he would not dress up for future Senate meetings.
The President indicated that he is looking forward to the office and has had a running start. The numerous meetings
with University personnel and entities over the last 6 months have been really valuable. He is most grateful for them
and is looking forward to continued “interchange”. “I have tried to indicate I understand that we are one community.”
Decisions will be made by the community.
 Trimesters and the more efficient use of summer. Student success is the objective. Why leave the University
fallow during part of the year? The question is how to use our capacity more effectively. The answer is very
complicated. [Daniels seems to move away from the immediate implementation of the trimester system.]
 Entrepreneurship and transfer of technology. Purdue research must impact the real world. There are great
conversations on this already. The faculty should lead them.
 Excellence of Purdue as an institution. “What do we believe excellence is? Only the faculty could do this for
the Board of Trustees and all of us.” “What should we quantify?”
 Student growth. “What value does Purdue add to intellectual growth and critical thinking?” “I suspect that with
greater accountability Purdue will look very good.” Purdue should be a leader in documenting this but “I am not
sure about how.” How much is added to a student’s skill set?
 Affordability and resource allocation. A new level of faculty involvement is needed. “I believe we can make
great progress if faculty, staff and students are involved.” Shared governance must mean shared accountability.
President Daniels emphasized that he is quite serious on this point: “we will fashion a modus operandi [in which]
the Faculty will be at or near the center.”
The speech was delivered without visual aids or notes.
5. Remarks of the Chairperson
Professor J. Paul Robinson
Chairperson Robinson’s presentation began with an extended section on cartoons adapted from Daniel’s political
career to his presidency of Purdue. The substantive section addressed concerns about the relationship of Faculty and
the Administration.
Robinson repeated the complaint about excessive spending on legal fees. It took 81days to get the public records. The
University provided a spread sheet 106 pages in length. Last year the University spent $1,581,491.41in legal against
Faculty affairs.
In an e-mail from an administrator concerning administrative bloat, Robinson was told that a prerequisite to a
meaningful discussion is a definition of basic terms. Robinson agreed and indicated how terms and figures have been
misused by the Administration. In some official statistics post docs are listed as faculty. Who would seriously consider
them as such? Nonetheless the number of faculty has fallen:
Faculty and lecturers
Adjuncts
2009/2010
2,783
330
2010/2011
2,682
339
Figures in the Data Digest on the number of administrators do not match those reported to IPED. One indicates an
increase in administrators, the other a decline. The decline in the number of administrator is due solely to a decline in
clerical staff. The clerical staff is overworked. Likewise, the faculty is faced with increased work with rising numbers
of graduate students.
Chairperson Robinson used an illustration from class indicating how images can intentionally misrepresent data. The
scholar in question was officially reprimanded. Robinson also showed a picture of an Australian toilet whose water
tank was combined with a sink allowing spent water to be used for flushing. Our most precious resource is the faculty.
We are squeezing everything possible out of them we. We must rethink the allocation of resources.
[No Powerpoint or copy of the text was provided. The numerous figures were only fleeting glimpses of fascinating data.]
6. Résumé of Items Under Consideration For Information by Various Standing Committees Professor James S. Lenhert
For the new President’s benefit, each committee chair described the functions of her committee and current business.
 Advisory Committee
Faculty leaders, APSAC, CSSAC and President – no notes kept.
4

Educational Policy Committee
Faculty and administration, regulate grading, standardization, general education, academic organization, etc.
 Faculty Affairs Committee
Responsibilities, rights, welfare of faculty, collective and individual, tenure. Advisors: Smith (Graduate School),
Rollock (Ethics), Davenport Sypher (Provost). Issues/documents: clinical faculty, on-line evaluation, COACHE
 Student Affairs Committee
Membership: faculty, students (graduate and undergraduate), Dean of Students.
Only major issue: Student Conduct Code. Subcommittee: Athletics
 University Resources Committee
Overview of money, planning, energy, architecture
 Nominating Committee
Seeks volunteers for faculty committees
 Steering Committee
Takes committee documents, decides what to do, drafts the agenda. “Nothing gets lost thanks to Joe Camp.”
[More information is available at http://www.purdue.edu/senate/committees/]
7. Question Time All questions were addressed to President Daniels.
Prof. Rust: Purdue Today announced the firing of the University’s legal counsel.
Daniels: Purdue was the only Big Ten University without in-house legal counsel. This was “sub-optimal”. It is more
rational to have a legal service clearing house. The new counsel will look at and revise regulations and
policies periodically.
Prof. Chambers: Will there be a new strategic plan?
Daniels: I am not ready for a final answer but such a huge exercise is very unlikely. There is nothing to quarrel with
in the current plan. Strategies define what is left out, a guide to action, not an endless issue. A few initiatives
should be identified. There is no need for a new document.
Prof. Hasting: How can “value added” in education be evaluated? What happened to BALOTS?
Daniels: “You’ve got me.” But I am excited by the possibilities of assessment at Purdue. The task is difficult but we
have talented people.
Prof. Hill asked for Daniels’ views on higher education in Indiana and specifically its community college system and
three public universities.
Daniel: Purdue has an easy story to tell. Does the State want an even more premier university? “We stumbled into a
system.” Regional campuses were to block community colleges. Purdue and IU are at the top.
Question: Distance learning is important and on-line instruction has been integrated into the University but on-line
education may not educate a person.
Daniels: There is no final answer. There are different kinds of students and the ¾ million who do not finish may be
able to do so because of on-line courses. On-line courses could be a better match for students than traditional
classes. For instance, lectures could be watched on-line and class would be devoted to other purposes.
Prof. Williams: Will there be a faculty member of the Board of Trustees? IU has one.
Daniels: The alumnus member could be faculty or faculty emeritus. “I am amenable to the idea.”
Prof. Hutzel asked about the 120 credit hour limit especially considering double majors, minors, summer programs.
Daniels: Automatic exceptions may reach 25%. Early evidence shows that ICHE will make exceptions.
8. Senate Document 12:3 Change to Academic Regulations and
Procedures on Scholastic Records - Duplicate Diplomas
After nearly 30 minutes of discussion, the following was approved:
Current
Academic Regulations and Procedures
Scholastic Records
F. Replacement of Diplomas (Board of Trustees minutes,
July 10, 1975)
A replacement diploma shall be issued to the original
holder, upon his/her affidavit, certifying to the loss or
damage of the original diploma and upon payment of the
cost of reproducing the diploma in its original format.
For Discussion
Professor Harold P. Kirkwood
Proposed
Academic Regulations and Procedures
Scholastic Records
F. Replacement of Diplomas (Board of Trustees minutes,
July 10, 1975)
A replacement diploma shall be issued to the original
holder, upon his/her affidavit, certifying to the loss or
damage of the original diploma and upon payment of the
cost of reproducing the diploma in its original format.
A duplicate diploma shall be issued to the original holder of
the diploma upon payment of the cost of reproducing the
duplicate diploma. The duplicate diploma will be marked as
“Duplicate,” in plain sight.
5
9. Presentation by the Editor-in-Chief of The Exponent
For Information
Editor-in-Chief Matt Thomas
“Students have difficulties getting answers from Faculty.” The Exponent receives no University funding. 100 students
receive stipends to work on the paper. The Exponent is the main source of information for Purdue. About 86% of
Purdue students and faculty read the paper daily. The staff may have, at times, misrepresented the faculty but that was
unintentional. Purdue does not have a school of journalism.
Chairperson Robinson observed that faculty hesitate to speak to reporters and would prefer e-mails. Thomas
responded that all interviews are recorded in audio. Prof. Hutzel stated that faculty can see a draft of their interview
before it is published. Thomas responded that that is actually not the case. The editor-in-chief ended his talk with
appreciation and gratitude.
23. Memorial Resolutions – nine names were read followed by a moment of silence.
24. Adjournment – 4:00 pm
[Next meeting of the Senate: Monday, 18 February 2013.]
Purdue University Senate
2012/2013 FACULTY AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
Fifth Meeting Feb 4, 2013 2:30-4:00PM
Room 119 Hovde Hall
I. Call to order - 2:34 pm
 Acceptance of Agenda - unanimous
 Approval of minutes from January meeting – unanimous approval of unedited, incomplete minutes.
II. Subcommittee Reports
 Censure and Dismissal Procedures – no cases pending. Morry Levy suggests that a special committee reexamine
such cases and reconsider B-48. It would be appropriate for the Faculty Affairs Committee to consider this.
 Faculty Compensation and Benefits (Professor Donald Buskirk, Chair) – the new Benefits Manager, Eva Nodine
made a presentation. Nothing to report to the Faculty Affairs Committee.
 University Grade Appeals - 2 grade appeals from the College of Engineering
III. Old Business
 Clinical Faculty Policy
- Clinical Faculty could have a first contract for 3 years, a second for up to 5 years.
- What were guidelines are now becoming policy.
* The Clinical Faculty are not necessarily clinical. Some Schools call them “professors of practice”, “teaching
professors”, “clinical/professional faculty” or “instructional faculty”.
- Issues of concern or yet to be decided include: lack of sabbaticals, service on committees, esp. promotion,
evaluations by the Graduate School, degree qualifications, 9 versus 12 month contracts.
- The draft limits the percentage of clinical faculty at West Lafayette to 10%, 20% on the regional campuses. Is this
wise or will this widen the gap between Purdue West Lafayette and the rest of the System? Will the high percentage at
the regionals threaten the autonomy of the Faculty by further limiting tenure? Vice Provost Davenport Sypher
remarked that the 20% provision has the approval of the regional campuses. Prof. Duzinkiewicz questioned whether
that approval came from the faculty. Prof. Sanders proposed a compromise figure of 15%. A lengthy discussion
concluded with a decision of the Committee, made by consensus, to ask each of the regional senates to express its
opinion not only on the issue of the special 20% but on the entire document. IUPUI would be exempted since its
Purdue Faculty are regulated by Indiana University.
- Prof. Yih pointed to the heart of the issue. What are all the different types of teaching positions at Purdue? What are
their specifications and what are their numbers? Davenport Sypher promised to supply an inventory next month.
 On-line Course Evaluation System – a special committee is continuing its discussions.
 COACHE survey – Vice Provost Sypher indicated that special insight could be gained by “talking to the successful
departments.” Prof. Yih observed that while her department’s scores were relatively low, the faculty is actually quite
happy. They simply are also quite critical by nature.
IV. New Business
 Summer Pay Policy Review (appointment of faculty member to Task Force) – the discussion is in its early stages.
The Board of Trustees desires an expansion of summer instruction. When one member of the committee suggested
that part of the compensation for increased teaching in the summer would be credit in the Faculty Annual Reports,
another observed, “The FAR is the biggest act of fiction each year.”
 Open Access Policy (from A. Rollock) – The policy is adrift. The Library is drafting a policy but the Senate
resolution carried with it no obligations.
 Academic Freedom Policy (from A. Rollock) – A separate policy on academic freedom should be drawn off from
the policy on Censure.
6
 Possible Review of B-48 – insufficient time for discussion.
V. Announcements/Items of Interest
 Beverly Davenport Sypher, Vice Provost for Faculty Affairs
 Alysa C. Rollock, Vice President of Ethics and Compliance
 Mark J.T. Smith, Dean of the Graduate School – a new policy on genuinely dual, not simultaneous, degrees with
other Universities is under development. The dual degrees would be rare.
[The meeting adjourned at 3:05 after members of the Steering Committee had already begun to set up their meeting.]
PURDUE UNIVERSITY CALUMET
UNIVERSITY SENATE MEETING
DATE February 6, 2013
3:30pm – SUL 321
A. Call to order – 3:33pm
B. Approval of the Agenda - unanimous
C. Approval of Minutes December meeting minutes – unanimous after some corrections
D. Special Business of the Day
 Chancellor Report - Dr. Thomas Keon – Senior leadership stressed to Daniels that Purdue Calumet is the
destination of choice. In addition, we need to spend more time thinking about our students.
 Chair Report - Prof. Feng-Song Wang – There will be a Spring Faculty Convocation.
 Curriculum document approval - Professor Leslie Rittenmeyer – no discussion, unanimous approval
o Regular Curriculum Documents (see Appendix)
o Experiential Learning (see Appendix)
o General Education Curriculum Documents (see Appendix)
 Other special business
o PUWL Senate Representative - Professor David Pick – “Trimesters on the back burner’, emphasis instead
on commercialization, expansion of engineering, finding quantity measurements for teaching and research
matrices, the complex problem of value added skills in the liberal arts, faculty governance, no new strategic
plan. Discussion: Daniels understands our role as a land grant university. Chancellor Keon related the story
of Daniels holding up a meeting at Calumet to speak in Spanish with a student whom he had challenged to
finish high school despite having a child at 16. That student is attending Purdue Calumet as “her destination
of choice.” Prof. Pick expressed concern about the developing Academic Standing Policy with its 2.0 GPA
minimum. On a positive note, he added that there has been “dramatic improvement in interaction between the
regional campuses and West Lafayette” in the last few years. The Intercampus Faculty Council and the
Purdue System Plan confirm this.
E. Committee Reports
 Academic Support Services Committee - Professor David Kozel
o For Discussion: SD 13-02 Change to Academic Calendar – a prolonged discussion about inserting a week
between spring semester and the Maymester yielded no decision.
 Curriculum and Educational Policy - Professor Leslie Rittenmeyer
o For Discussion: SD 07-18 EXL approval process-Revision – separate numbers for experiential learning
courses
 Faculty Affairs - Professor Janet Buckenmeyer
o For Discussion: SD 13-01 Resolution-Heonors College Concept – unanimous vote to expand the Honors
program into an Honors College.
o Special Report - Budget committee report – Income declining significantly. We need a new fitness center.
 Nominating Committee - Professor Michael Dobberstein
 Committee for Student Affairs - Professor Tom Roach
 Student Government - Student Body Representative Ms. Marisa Henderson – Good meeting with Daniels who
was surprised when, in answer to his question, no one indicated that they would prefer to be in West Lafayette.
Chancellor Keon praised Ms. Henderson and the students. The Senate agreed.
 Agenda Committee - Professor Michael Dobberstein – no report
F. Unfinished Business
G. New Business
H. Open Discussion
I. Adjournment - 4:40 pm
Reported by Janusz Duzinkiewicz
10 February 2013
7