MINUTES OF MEETING NUMBER 109
OF The
Senate OF mICHIGAN tECHNOLOGical university
12 December 1979
(Senate Minute pages: 1654-1670)
Meeting No. 109 was called to order on Wednesday, December 12, 1979 at 7:06 p.m. in the Faculty Lounge of the Memorial Union by President O. David Boutilier.
The roll was called by the Secretary. Twenty-five members or alternates were present. Absent were Lide (HU), Noble (GE), Shetron (FFC), Adams (IWR), Alexander (BA), Bates (CH/CM), Janners (BL), Johnson (IMR), Wilkinson (Grad. Student Council).
Secretary's note: a number of absences resulted from an unexplained faculty mailing of the agendas.
Acknowledgement of Visitors: Visitors were MA/CS faculty members Karl Ottenstein and Linda Ottenstein. Staff member Jim Escamilla operated the recording equipment.
The Minutes of Meeting No. 108.
Action was deferred until the next meeting.
President's Report
Boutilier presented the President's Report (Appendix A - Available by Request from the Senate Office). He noted that editorial changes, acceptable to the Senate President and Dr. Stein, had been made in Proposal 2-80 to clarify its intent prior to inclusion of that Proposal in the Faculty Handbook. David Sprague was introduced and seated as the new Senator from KRC.
Report on Meeting of the Academic Council.
Reynolds presented a report on the meeting of the Academic Council held on November 6, 1979. This report is concerned mainly with an account by Dean Meese of the activities and problems that his office deals with. It is attached as Appendix B (Available by Request from the Senate Office). Reynolds also gave a preliminary report on the meeting of December 11. The bulk of this meeting was taken up by reports from the computer planning committee and the professional development committee and with reports on the problem solving and proposal writing workshops. Dr. Gale announced at the meeting that, immediately following the Board meeting of December 14, reappointment letters would be hand carried to the departments so that the appropriate faculty members could be notified.
Reports on Meetings of the Board of Control.
There have been no meetings of the Board of Control since the last Senate meeting.
Eleventh Annual Report to the Faculty - Nelson reported that this has not yet been distributed but that it will be coming shortly.
Committee Reports
A. Curricular Policy
G Agin, chairman; M. Berry, V. Snyder, P. Nelson, C. Nelson, E. Huang, W. Griffin (student). Agin distributed a report (Appendix C - Available by request from the Senate Office) that had been submitted to the University Course Change Committee. It recommends guidelines for treating a list of specific problems that had been troubling that committee.
B. Instructional Policy
Tampas gave the report for chairperson M. Sloan, who was out of town. The committee has continued to investigate ways in which the academic calendar can be modified. Because of the time needed for processing and mailing grades, there appears to be no way to shorten the length of between term breaks. Also, a minimum of one day is needed for scramble (course change, etc.). As a result of an equipment problem and tardiness by some faculty members, fall term grades were delayed and thus were mailed to local rather than home addresses. This caused a problem on scramble day.
C. Institutional Evaluation - No Report. There is no chairperson at this time.
D. Elections Committee - V. Snyder, chairman and C. Givens. No Report.
E. Joint Committee on Relations Between the Senate and Faculty Association
A. Pintar, chairman; B. Baltensberger, E. Erickson, B. Pegg, V. Doane. Pintar reported that there is difficulty getting the AMCF delegate to the meetings downstate. For the November meeting, sufficient notification was not received to allow arrangements for anyone to attend.
F. Promotional Policy and Professional Standards and Development
R.K. Miller, chairman; D. Daaavettila, G. Dawson, S. Shetron, S. Tidwell. Miller reported that the committee is still examining the results of its questionnaire to the faculty. On the question pertaining to a professional development interview with one's department head in the past year, about one half of the forty who responded said that they had not had such an interview.
G. . Faculty Handbook.
C.R. Crowther, chairman; W. Anderson, A. Brokaw, A. Pintar, J. Kuipers (ex officio). Crowther said that the committee has reviewed the proof copy for the new faculty handbook and when it is available (January anticipated) they will compare it with the procedures manual for possible discrepancies between the two.
H. Faculty Fringe Benefits
F. Reynolds, chairman; R. Adams, K. Baldwin, P. Boutilier, R. Callen, E. Erickson. Reynolds presented a summary of the committee's first analysis of the faculty benefits survey report (attached as Appendix D - Available by request from the Senate Office). This report had been prepared at the request of the Board of Control and will be officially submitted at the December 14 meeting. While there are different ways to interpret the report, it is aimed at a comparison between MTU and other schools of dollars, at the various ranks, put into the fringe benefits program. The first page itemizes areas in which MTU does not have benefits but in which a good number of the comparison schools do.
In relation to item eight on MTU's low ranking in combined employer-employee contributions to retirement, Pres. Stein observed that faculty are permitted to make an employee contribution and he stated that he supports the position that this contribution be voluntary rather than mandatory.
Pres. Stein also asked if there are any areas where MTU has benefits that other schools do not. Reynolds replied that he did not believe MTU to be unique in any benefit.
A statement was added to the report to the effect that MTU compares favorably with the other schools in 80% of the items surveyed.
Reynolds said that the committee felt that MTU may be paying too much for some of the benefits received and that to address this question was the committee's next task.
Boutilier asked how the comparison schools (other than Michigan schools, as expected) had been chosen. Reynolds replied that they consist of a group of peer schools (the so-called Colorado group) that have been reporting to each other on financial information regarding the faculty and also a group which have an engineering orientation.
Old Business - There was no old business.
New Business
A. Proposal 4-80, Master of Science in Computer Science
BACKGROUND:
The proposed program was approved unanimously by the faculty of the Department of Mathematical and Computer Sciences on October 12, 1978. It was approved by the department heads in the College of Sciences and Arts on November 9, 1978 and forwarded by the Dean to the Vice President of Academic Affairs on November 15, 1978. The proposal was referred to the Graduate Council where a Review Committee studied it in detail and recommended approval in a report dated May 31, 1979. The Graduate Council on September 28, 1979 unanimously voted "that the program leading to the Master of Science degree in Computer Science be approved." Senate Policy 10-70, Procedures for Developing Significant Changes in the Academic Program, requires that the Senate Curricular Policy Committee review the proposal and submit a recommendation to the Senate. The Senate, in turn, is required to submit a recommendation to the President. On October 29, 1979 the Curricular Policy Committee voted unanimously to recommend that the Senate approve the proposed Master of Science in Computer Science.
PROPOSAL:
The Senate of Michigan Technological University recommends the establishment of a program leading to the Master of Science degree in Computer Science. A description of the program follows:
Required courses in the areas of computation theory, design and analysis of algorithms, operating systems, and software engineering: 16q.h.
Other Computer Science courses: 12 q.h.
Additional courses selected with the advisor's approval: Thesis credit, if any, will be in this category: 17 q.h.
For a total of 45 q.h.
Any M.S. candidate in Computer Science may elect to write a thesis (Graduate School plan A) and, with the advisor's consent, may apply 9 to 12 quarter hours of thesis credit toward the total requirements for the M.S. degree. In lieu of a thesis, additional coursework is required (Graduate School plan C). The minimum number of quarter hours for the M.S. degree in Computer Science with or without a thesis is 45 quarter hours.
Final Examination:
The candidate for the M.S. degree must successfully complete a three-hour written comprehensive examination.
Thesis:
If the student elects to write a thesis, the thesis may be in any area deemed acceptable by the thesis committee. An oral defense of the thesis is required and is taken as the oral examination.
Oral Examination:
Regardless of whether or not a thesis is elected, an oral examination is required in accordance with Graduate School regulations.
Following editorial changes, which have now been incorporated into the above statement of the proposal, 4-80 was moved and seconded.
In response to a question about any potential problem with allocations of resources or with staffing, Acting Vice President Gale noted that MTU has a PRR submitted, now going through the appropriate process, which asks for funding and permission to implement this program. Implementation will not take place until there is legislative approval and hence the necessary funding.
President Stein said that the PRR for the M.S. in Computer Science is in a priority group of five among the PRRs submitted and thus it is reasonable to anticipate that approval will be granted. He further noted that the growth of the Computer Science program at the bachelor's level has been dramatic, that the demand nationally for master's level people is very high and hence it is to be expected that many will wish to avail themselves of the new program. Moreover, it will strengthen the total Computer Science program and attract new faculty. In addition to student interest and faculty support, the program has the endorsement of the administration.
The proposal was accepted by a vote of 23-0.
B. Draft Proposal - On behalf of the Fringe Benefits Committee, Reynolds read the following draft proposal:
Fringe benefits for the Academic Faculty should be based on conditions of service to the University without regard to the number of pay periods elected by the employee.
He said this proposal is designed to address the problems that arose when some faculty members elected the new 18.9 pay periods plan. Most fringe benefits are not affected, but sick leave accrues by the pay period. Although faculty members had advance knowledge of this effect (Reynolds read the Employee Relations memo that had been circulated), the committee feels that the policy should be equal benefits for equal work.
The draft proposal was assigned number 5-80 and will be submitted for Senate consideration at the next meeting.
C. MTU Liability Insurance
A question was raised about the extent to which faculty members are covered by the MTU liability insurance, e.g. those who serve on department safety committees or those who drive busses on field trips. Crowther said that there has not been a clear answer on this point even from the State Attorney General's Office.
The matter was referred to the Promotional Policy and Professional Stands and Development Committee.
D. Summer Teacher Compensation Rate
The Academic Council is reviewing compensation for summer teaching. One possible action is the reduction of the full-time summer pay rate from 29.1% to the previous 22% level. The summer teaching compensation question was referred to the Summer Session Review Committee.
The meeting adjourned at 7:58 p.m.