MINUTES OF MEETING NUMBER 149
OF The
Senate OF mICHIGAN tECHNOLOGical university

26 March 1986

(Senate Minute pages: 2511 -2517)

President's Report

The President submitted a written report attached as Appendix 1 (Available by Request from the Senate Office). He gave a brief oral summary of the report.

Vice President's Report:

The Vice President submitted a written report attached as Appendix 2 (Available by Request from the Senate Office). Two matters relating to the Vice-President's report of her visit to the Board of Control meeting resulted in considerable Senate discussion: a resolution on Academic Freedom and a resolution changing the Board of Control Policy Manual in such a way that the term "Academic Faculty" no longer includes research faculty. "Academic Faculty" is now defined as faculty "having a reporting relationship to the Vice President for Academic Affairs." (See Vice-President's Report).

There was concern that the resolution on Academic Freedom should not become Board of Control policy until it has been considered by the Senate for its recommendations. There was a consensus that no change should be made in the present policy on Academic Freedom until the Senate acted on the matter. President Brokaw proposed that the Executive Committee look into the matter and come back to the next faculty meeting with a proposal.

There was also considerable concern about the impact of excluding "research faculty" from the present definition used for "academic faculty" in the Board of Control Manual. The Senate wanted to know whether such a change would affect tenure or working conditions of persons the Senate represents. If such a change did change tenure or working conditions, it should not be done without a hearing in the Senate and without considering its recommendations. One Senator reported on what a colleague had reported to him which, if true, several Senators felt would be an abuse of research faculty's privileges. Since the report came from a faculty member who reported anonymously, the Senate felt it would be improper to consider the report. Since Senator Monson, through his work with the Faculty Handbook, seemed most knowledgeable on the subject, President Brokaw asked him to get together with him to investigate this matter more thoroughly.

Committee Reports

A. Curricular Policy - No Report.

B. Instructional Policy

The Chairman reported that he had talked with Dr. Stein on Proposals 4-86 and 5-86 and that Dr. Stein indicated that his decision was imminent. The chairman was confident that both proposals would be adopted.

C. Institutional Evaluation: No report.

D. Budget - No report.

E. Faculty Fringe Benefits

The Chairman, while expressing gratitude for an ERO publication on faculty fringe benefits, was concerned that as a result of apparent double counting the impression given by the ERO publication was misleading. President Brokaw encouraged the chairman of the committee to discuss the matter with ERO. He was encouraged to ask not only about the apparent inaccurate perception given by some apparent double counting, but also to find out how the data in the report are being used. The chairman was concerned that if they are being so reported to AAUP, they would be greatly misleading.

F. Elections

The Chairman announced that he will soon be submitting to faculty the positions on the Sabbatical Leave Committee, the Athletic Council, and the General Education Committee which the Senate participates in filling. He noted that the procedure calls for the Senate to nominate three persons for the Sabbatical Leave Committee, two persons for the Academic Council, and one for the General Education Committee. The President of the University picks one person for each committee from the Senate nominees. Senate nominations will be made at the next meeting of the Senate. Also to be nominated at the next Senate meeting are the Senators At Large.

G. Faculty Handbook

The Chairman reported that approval of Senate suggestions for changes in the Faculty Handbook had not come as rapidly as expected. President Brokaw suggested that the chair should continue to pursue the matter and that if a decision was not made soon, the Senate President would see what he could do to help in pressing the matter.

H. Teaching Effectiveness

The chairman invited Bob Jones, Director for the Center for Teaching Effectiveness to report his activities and plans for the future. He reported his efforts to consult with all departments and to explain the program of teacher evaluation. He acknowledged that most snags had taken place in relationship to peer evaluation. He noted that great efforts were taking place to offer workshops on teaching to faculty and teaching assistants and that more efforts would be forthcoming especially in helping foreign teaching assistants whose language facility tests show they do not have adequate mastery of English to teach in the language. All TA's would be given instruction in a workshop before beginning teaching this Fall. Foreign TA's would be given intensive training in both oral and written use of the English language to insure that their communication with students is effective. He noted also that he developed these programs only after consulting GTA directors, Deans, and the GTA's themselves. GTA's were especially positive about workshops and seminars. He also reported that he was ready to recommend that we develop a system of student evaluation independent of the University of Illinois system. He felt the norms developed by the University of Illinois not to be valid university wide at Michigan Tech. The program he would suggest would have more than the five items suggested by the U. of Illinois. He suggested that departments might be able to develop banks of questions unique to that particular department.

I. Planning: No Report.

J. General Education

The Chairman noted that his report would not only report what the Senate Committee was doing but what was being done university wide in general education. He then noted that the Academic Council had approved a new Green book to replace the Orange book on general education. There were few changes in it. Among the changes was a provision which specifies "department by department" what humanities courses must be taken to meet the communications requirement.

The chairman reported that only 300 copies of the green book had been printed because Bill Dix was certain that the book would need revision in the Fall because of additions of new courses in the catalog. The chair specifically disassociated himself from that decision.

He noted that 27 thematic groups are listed in the green book and that students, in consultation with their advisor, could develop thematic clusters of their own.

Students would be expected to put these advisor-student created clusters on his/her degree schedule far in advance of taking these courses and these, like other thematic clusters, would be inspected and approved by department heads, deans, and the Vice President.

Several Senators expressed the view that it was fundamentally wrong to have printed so few copies of the green book. At least enough should have been printed to distribute to all faculty.

Old Business - None.

New Business

Proposal 7-86, Extension of Implementation Period Teaching Effectiveness

It was clarified that a vote for this proposal automatically extends the present policy on teacher evaluation and other aspects of the Teacher Effectiveness program to the end of the Fall term.

Proponents of the proposal noted that a large proportion of the faculty had not yet been evaluated and that among them were an even higher proportion of senior faculty. They felt that it was impossible to evaluate the program without at least the data that could be gathered only at the end of Spring term.

They also noted that the Teaching Effectiveness Committee promised to recommend whether or not to keep the program until a full year's experience with the program. To keep its word, the committee needs the full year's experience, the input of faculty through questionnaires yet to be sent out on that year's experience, and the effect of evaluation (whatever that might be) on salary and promotion decisions this Spring.

Opponents were not convinced that the Spring data was that important. They felt that a valid decision could just as well be made now. They also noted that those evaluated this Spring were not subject to salary and promotion decisions that would be affected by teacher evaluation so that would require another year to be properly evaluated.

The President called for the Ayes and Nays on Proposal 7-86 (Appendix 3 - (Available by Request from the Senate Office) and the Senate supported the proposal unanimously .

When President Brokaw called for new business, one of the Senators relayed a request made by a colleague that the Senate investigate whether or not retirement credit was given during Sabbatical Leave. The question arose out of a statement in MPESERS November 1985 which cast doubt on whether retirement benefits were paid during Sabbatical Leaves taken after June 1981. There was a difference of opinion on the matter with some suggesting that retirement was paid on only the partial salary received during retirement and others that retirement pay did not change. It was decided to have the chairman of the fringe benefits committee investigate the matter and report back to the Senate.

The Senate adjourned at 8:32 p.m.