FACULTY SENATE MEETING MINUTES

Friday, August 26, 2005, 2:00 p.m.

UC Tejas 106B

Present: Bickley, Buck, Cosgrove, Carroll, Cook, Fugate, Harper, Hartlaub, Hill, Ivy, Layman, Ledbetter, Melrose, Oliver, Wingfield, Talley, Thomas, Waheed, Willman, Winston, Yellen

Absent: Friday, Garcia

Guest: Neeb

I. Call to Order and Approval of the Minutes of the April 22 meeting

Ivy called the meeting to order at 2:08 p.m. It was moved and seconded to approve minutes from last April. Some Senators did not receive a packet containing the minutes from the last Senate meeting. The minutes were approved.

II. Speaker's Report

A. Senate Roster corrections; materials in binders (committee membership, bylaws, etc.)

A Senate Roster was passed around for all Senators to update their contact information. Ivy briefly mentioned the materials to be found in the new Senate Binders: corrections to the rooms for Senate meetings, a list of committee members, revised By-laws, and Roberts Rules of Order.

B. New Faculty Orientation: initial session (8/18); three sessins in fall semester (attachment)

Approximately 41 new people attended the initial New Faculty Orientation on August 18, which was a half day session with lunch in PAD lobby. New Faculty Orientation will extend through the semester, with Senate partnering with Faculty Renaissance Center (FRC). The "Focus on Students" is a new idea, with a student panel. The Orientation retains "Focus on Teaching" and "Focus on Research." Ivy asked for suggestions for speakers or topics to present. Ledbetter asked if there would be focus on teaching online in the teaching session. Ivy will consider that as a topic for that session.

C. Faculty Story Hour

A two hour Story Time was held in Legacy Hall, with faculty members with 25 or more years of service telling stories of the University's past. Ivy received positive responses about this event.

D. Update on hiring adminstrative assistant; use of Senate conference room (office key)

Jackie Alnor, the Faculty Senate administrative assistant, graduate, and moved to Northern California. Ivy is in the process of hiring a new administrative assistant. Bickley and Friday will assist in screening applicants. Carroll asked about pay, which is near $12,000, about $800/mo. Benefits are possibly available. The application process is online and Ivy requested Senators to forward names or suggestions to Ivy. The lack of an administrative assistant will create problems for people needing to use the Senate Office for meetings. Ivy requested Committee Chairs to schedule meetings through her, and she will make the office available. The lack of an administrative assistant also affects Senate supplies and travel. At this point travel requests will be processed through Provost's office, as ther eis no one who can do this for Senate.

E. Executive Committee and Senate meetings schedule (attachment)

The last page in the packet contains the meeting schedule for the Senate and the Senate Executive Committee. Anything that will be on Senate's agenda must go through the Executive Committee. Ivy requested Senators and Committee Chairs plan accordingly in order to get things on the Agenda. The time frame allows us to get packets out in time for meetings. Room locations for Senate meetins will be updated.

F. Membership on Executive Committee (at-large members)

The selection of the Executive Committee occurred at the very end of the last meeting. There are no representatives for the College of Education and the College of Nursing. Ivy would prefer having two more, from those colleges. There was discussion about how to equalize the representation, including having some members rotate off the Executive Committee. An alternative was suggested, to allow only one vote from each college. Thee was consensus that this was a good alternative. Hill fromthe College of Education, and Yellen from the Colleg eof Nursing volunteered to serve as at-large members. It was moved and seconded to add these members to Executive Committee, with a friendly amendment to restrict colleges to one vote apiece. The motion passed by acclamation.

G. Guest Speakers for Senate meetings

Ivy suggested the Senate ask Ed People, the new director of University Services, and Don Miles the bookstore manager, to speak to the Senate for 10-15 minutes at the September meeting.

Ivy asked Senators about guest speakers they would be interested in hearing. Some suggestions were to hear about Dr. Johnston's new grant project, and about migrating to the Banner & Luminis systems. Senate usually schedules speakers in the fall, not spring, as meetings become longer in the spring, due to the volume of business. Layman asked about the committee working on logos for each of the colleges. Harper explained that the "Integrated Marketing Council" was putting forward a timeline, and any units with a logo (a symbol used repeatedly to establish identity of a group), need to communicate with the committee. This is to ensure every logo fits in with the University's symbols. Jorge Remirez is the contact persn for thsi Concil. Senate did not need to hear from this council at this time, but may request information from the group at a later date. Ivy asked Senators to send her any other ideas for guest speakers.

H. Update on Workload Survey

Academic Affairs presented this survey to the whole faculty last year, and got a 20% rsponse rate. Their recommendation was to re do it this year and work for a better response rate. Ivy and Harper decided it would be too distracting to distribute in the initial faculty meeting. Cook asked if this information was going to be used. Harper responded that it begtan when faculty were concerned about reassigning teaching loads. If everyone went to a reduced workload, there would be a cost. Is that a good use of our money from the faculty's perspective? If we want to make reduced workload a goal, what are the faculty's priorities in a budgetary context? Ivy charged the Academic Affairs Committee with revisiting this idea. The method of reaching people is important, as is anonymity.

III. Provost's Report

A. President's Investiture

The President's Investiture will be held Saturday, September 10, 2005. Faculty and libgrarians will be part of the processional and will be receiving reminders about the processional. The processional will be different from that of Commencement. In a traditional investiture ceremony, those in professorial ranks with longest tenure will be first, then those in associate professor rans, and so on. Faculty will receive a list of the order of the processional. Faculty will be in regalia and will robe at the Center for the Arts. There will be people to assist. A reception immediately follows in the commons area of the University Center. Other events are happening throughout the week. Instructions will be provided to all participants.

B. Momentum 2015

The Provost plans to work on an implementation plan for Momentum 2015 in mid-September, creating a concrete action plan with responsible parties, time lines and funding. August 15 is the date of the latest document, which is located on the web, at the Planning and Institutional effectiveness web site: http://pie.tamucc.edu/, clicking on the links "Stragegic Planning" and then "Momentum 2015."

C. Common campus email addresses

This was addressed in the Faculty meeting of August 19, 2005.

D. Funding of faculty merit pay and equity adjustments

There are two funding sources for new money: State allocation and tuition. State allocations are based on growth from the last counting period taking into account various levels of semester credit hours. Compared to two years ago, we have more credit hours and therefore get new money for growth. The other funding stream came from the increase in tutition - $4 per credit hour, which came to approximately $800,000. Those are the two funding sources for the merit raises. Ivy thanked the provost for the equity raises for professors. President Killebrew felt strongly about the equity adjustments and invested about $200,000 for full professor equity. They used DUPA data for the national average for full professors for our sized schools. This had been one of our goals from years back, to get full professors to the national average by 2005, and to work toward getting everyone else to national average by 2007, and then to work toward aspirants. Thomas asked about the comparative level, which was Masters I, 5000-8000 FTE. Buck asked if everyone is aware of the whole package of what it takes to get to doctoral status. Probably not, according to Harper. Momentum doesn't talk about that, but that we're moving in that direction. Right now we're Master's I in Texas schools. Most schools in Texas are in Master's I. The next level up is A&M Kingsville and A&M Commerce. A&M Corpus Christi would like to be in the level beyond that, which contains only UT system schools, Texas Tech and North Texas. No A&M schools are in that leve. The level beyond that is UT and A&M. Our arrival at that point will be 10 years from now. It will take $25 million of restricted research to be in the emerging doctoral level. UTSA is an example of a school in the emerging doctoral level. We are ahead of A&M Commerce and A&M Kingsville in every category except for the number of doctoral degrees granted.

IV. New Business

A. Special Election, College of Education (Melrose)

Tabled until Melrose can appear. Ivy explained that we need a Senate representative on the University Calendar Committee, which meets once a month. Talley volunteererd to be Senate's representative.

B. Suggestion Box (Garcia)

In the past, Senators have received anonymous questions about accreditation and department or college processes. Ivy believes it is important to attend to anonymous questions. Harper took the question to the Dean's Council. Harper will report on the response from the Dean's Council.

Ivy thought there was a role for Faculty Seante in situations where faculty may perceive a threat. She would like to encourage faculty to communicate issues they are concerned about. We could transform our ballot box into a faculty suggestion box. The expectation is that we are going to listen and respond. There was discussion and Oliver expressed the need for a process. Ivy stated that the Executive Committee will consider a process, and the idea of an Ombudsperson was raised. Thomas asked about the overall grievance process, and if a person can remain anonymous. No, they may not. The Ombudsperson model exists in the academic standards process. DAve Billeaux could inform us about this process.

Melrose arrived and stated the need to hold an election for a Senator from the College of Education. This involvees the Awards, By-laws and Election Committee, chaired by Buck. Willman, Melrose and Buck are the ABE committee and will work to get this election completed by the September meeting.

V. Other Business and Announcements

Bob Neeb brought up an issue about student withdrawal via medical withdrawal. He felt we need more procedures and requested Senate look at the process and perhaps provide for faculty input for any grade changes.

Neeb brought up another issue for Senate to consider, that of plagiarism. Even with warnings and remarks in the syllabus, students are not attending to this. Harper remarked that plagtiarism carries with it a range of punishment, up to dismissal from the university. It goes through the Office of Student Affairs, and it may be more of an academic standards issue. We need language to firm up the policy.

Carroll noted that under th academic rules in the catalog, when a student withdraws from the semester, it should be for all classes. The incident Neeb describes might be a violation of catalog rules. Medical incapacitation requires that a student drop everything. There was discussion regarding emotional problems, requesting an incomplete, privacy of medical records. Faculty needs to be in on any grade changes.

It was moved and seconded to extend the meeting at 4 p.m.

VI. Issues Generation, Goal-Setting Session and Assignments to Committees

Senators noted issues brought forth by their constituents for Senate to pursue this year. Senators prioritized the issues and then assigned committees to work on them throughout the year. There was discussion about the procedure and Senate agreed to think about a different method when there is more time.

Issues noted and actions taken:

Senate Action Item # of votes Committee assigned
Yes
Student Withdrawals/control of changing grades
12
Academic Affairs
Yes
Plagiarism
7
Academic Affairs
Yes
Associate professors and salary compression
9
 
  Reorganization of upper level credit/120 hours
3
 
  Revisit promotion and tenure
7
Ivy will request status
Yes
Cost of Living Adjustments
7
Budget Committee
  Parking
0
 
  Funding for faculty development leave
6
 
Yes
Support for doctoral program, workload, etc.
8
Faculty Affairs
Yes
Clinical faculty definitions and terms
8
Faculty Affairs
  Evaluative criteria for performance, promotion, tenure
7
 
  Finals schedule - Friday nights
2
 
Yes
Workload/junior faculty workload
7
Faculty Affairs
Yes
12 month appointments
10
Committee on Committees
  Attendance
4
 
  Plus or minus grading system
0
 
  Smoking
6
Committee on Committees will continue with this

VII. Adjournment

It was moved and sconded to adjourn the meeting at 4:55 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted by Sally Bickley, Secretary