MINUTES OF MEETING NUMBER thirty-seven
OF THE
sENATE OF the mICHIGAN tECHNOLOGical university
24 January 1968
(Senate Minute pages: 321-327)
The meeting opened at 7:10 p.m., Wednesday January 24, 1968, in the Faculty Lounge of the Memorial Union, Senate President D. Halkola presiding.
The roll was taken. Present (21) were: Bahrman, Boutilier, Heldt, Johnson, J.A., Johnson, V.W., Noble, Pollock, Bayer, Boyd, Bredekamp, Halkola, Hamilton, Hennessy, Brylla, Kenny, Ortner, Oswald, Patterson, Price, Wyble, Stebbins.
Absent (9) were: Sheedy, Yerg, Barstow, Been, Bovard, Keeling, Brown, Kennedy, Smith, R.L.
Guest present: D. Rappley.
The Secretary was instructed to call members of the Senate who have not attended a meeting this academic year to request those Senators (Sheedy, Been, Bovard) to attend or to arrange for their departments to elect replacements for them. This action was taken to reduce the possibility of lacking a quorum (20) present for the Senate to conduct business.
The agenda for the meeting was accepted with one change: Item IV, A, sentence 2 - changed to - "that the Senate be informed -."
To answer the request for information concerning the "Goals for MTU" Dr. Stebbins stated that he will provide a copy of this document to each department office.
The minutes of Meetings #36 were accepted with one change - page 315, near bottom, "Dr. Stebbins - It is now used on this campus."
Old Business
General Faculty Definition Committee. M.W. Bredekamp, Chairman, minutes pp. 297-99, 307, 312-314, 319-320.
Dr. Bredekamp moved, Dr. Heldt seconded acceptance of this report. Discussion followed.
Dr. Bredekamp: If adopted these definitions provide needed terms. A committee can then examine the constitution for agreement with present desires. These definitions can serve as a working base.
Dr. Stebbins: How does this tie in with academic rank, tenure, faculty status, etc.? Incompatibilities can develop.
Major Brylla: How do this? Have a joint meeting?
Dr. Stebbins: I don't know. Combine committees perhaps.
Dr. Bredekamp: There is no use of term faculty in the academic rank policy (minutes 300-301).
Dr. Stebbins: Members of the academic rank committee can be faculty or not.
The Chair requested consideration of the motion as originally made by Prof. Hamilton (minutes 319), repeated above.
Dr. Pollock: In minutes (pg. 297 - middle) the terms "communications and procedures" appears. What does this mean?
Dr. Bredekamp: People may ask for consultation with a member of the faculty. Whom is meant? General faculty term too broad.
Dr. Heldt: The term "General Faculty" will remain.
Prof. Hennessy: The faculty wives can define faculty as they wish.
Dr. Pollock: What meaning has the term "staff"? Are some faculty, others staff?
Dr. Stebbins: Faculty and staff denotes everybody of professional standing.
Dr. Heldt: The Board of Control provided sabbatical leave to the "General Faculty."
Dr. Bredekamp: Redefinition needed using terms provided by this proposal.
Prof. Boutilier: Changes were made by the Senate in the proposal. These are: Delete II-1; change II-2 (minutes 313); reinstate III-C. No action on IV-5 appears in the minutes.
Prof. Bayer: Item III-C, once removed, is now back in. This fouls up the Senate election for one thing. Many who are not interested in the Senate are thus permitted to vote.
Major Brylla moved amendment to Section I. "The general faculty of the University shall be members of the academic faculty as defined in Section III-A." Prof. V.W. Johnson seconded. Discussion followed.
Dr. Bredekamp: The Senate constitution should be modified using the definitions provided. This will remove some of the Senate organization.
Prof. Oswald: It is presumptuous of us to think we are dictating.
Prof. Hamilton: The committee has argued this before.
Major Brylla: This motion defines faculty, others can be staff.
Prof. Boutilier: What of present administrators who were once faculty?
Pres. Halkola: What will be the effect of this amendment, if accepted, on this report?
Prof. Bayer: In III-C what means "or equivalent experience?"
Dr. Bredekamp: Such as a practicing engineer having no formal degree but does have 30 years of experience.
Dr. Stebbins: Learned profession means academic degree.
Dr. Pollock: Support Prof. Hamilton's remark.
Prof. Boutilier: Yet we have a man teaching a course and giving credit who is not granted faculty rank (Mr. Lonsdorf).
Voted was taken on the amendment. It failed 5 Yes, 13 No.
Dr. Bredekamp moved, Prof. Noble seconded, changing the wording of III-C to "or professor of equivalent experience" (minutes 298).
Pres. Halkola: Grammatical alterations don't alter a motion.
Dr. Heldt: How plug in a definition when general faculty is mentioned?
Dr. Bredekamp: Tenure is involved for one. Each individual case will require Senate action.
Vote was taken on the main motion. It passed: 11 Yes, 7 No.
Emeritus Rank Committee, O.D. Boutilier, Chairman, minutes 309-310, 315.
Prof. Boutilier reviewed request from President Smith and the framing of original policy. Suggestions made by the Senate resulted in a revised version which is presented. Prof. Boutilier moved placing it on the next meeting agenda. This was passed by vote.
Policy Relating to Emeritus Rank
Standing Committees, D.W. Stebbins, Chairman
Proposal 1: Academic Rank. Minutes 299-301, 307, 314-315. Although passed at the previous meeting (#36) there was some discussion of it:
Dr. Bredekamp: Who makes decision on academic rank?
Dr. Stebbins: I do. A committee has trouble acting on such matters although they can provide guidelines. No standing committee is required by this proposal however.
Proposal 2: Instructional Policy Committee. Minutes 316-318. As modified (318). Dr. Stebbins moved acceptance. Prof. Hennessy seconded. Voice vote approved the proposal to appoint this committee.
Proposal 3: Curricular Policy Committee. Minutes 318-319. As modified (319). Dr. Stebbins moved acceptance, Prof. Hennessy seconded. Voice vote approved the proposal to appoint this committee.
Academic Freedom and Administrative Rule Making Power, W.E. Barstow, Chairman. Minutes 319. At the request of Prof. Barstow, who was absent, Prof. Hennessy moved, Prof. Boutilier seconded that this proposal be referred to the Instructional Policy Committee when it is appointed. This was approved by voice vote.
Committee to Study Senate Procedural Policy (minutes 319), Dr. Yerg, Chairman. Since Dr. Yerg and Prof. Barstow were absent, Prof. Bahrman, the third committee member, stated that the committee has met and considered some streamlining of Senate business. No formal report is yet ready, however.
New Business
Goals for MTU. Dr. Stebbins described the procedure for determining the role of each institution in Michigan in the plans being made by the State Board of Higher Education. A first draft of the MTU role was presented to the Senate members for suggestions. These were incorporated into the final draft which was approved by our Board of Control. Copies of this draft will be made available in each department office.
Dr. Bredekamp requested correction of the election procedure report (minutes 281-83, 294, 305-307, 314) to bring it in line with the new faculty definitions accepted here tonight.
Resolutions presented by Prof. S. Price. These had appeared in the agenda announced for this meeting. Prof. Price stated that responsibilities which he faces had led to his framing these resolutions. He read resolution I:
RESOLVED: (a) That the MTU Faculty Senate endorse the concept of the Interfaculty Association as a channel to the State Board of Education pending a later report from the Interfaculty Council; and (b) That the MTU Faculty Senate through liaison with the Faculty Association Council of MTU work out an agreement on procedures for nominating and electing delegates to the Interfaculty Council and on means for defraying the expenses incurred by the Interfaculty Council and the Interfaculty Assoc.
Prof. Price moved, Dr. Ortner seconded, acceptance of this resolution. Discussion followed.
Prof. Oswald: How can the Senate fund anything?
Pres. Halkola: The Senate has no funds.
Dr. Bredekamp: We are in conflict with our Board of Control if we go to the State Board.
Prof. Price: Our membership in IFA has so far been through our Faculty Association. Thus we are party to the concept of the IFA as a channel to the State Board. In this way direct representation of the faculties of the several schools to the State Board is provided. How our delegates to the IFC are chosen and how funded is important to us as Senators.
Dr. Bredekamp: The Senate cannot do more than make recommendations to President Smith. We cannot liaison with the Faculty Association.
Dr. Pollock: What is the meaning of "endorse?"
Prof. Price: On other campuses the Senates are involved. Here the Faculty Association carries the ball. It is a very narrow concept of Senate action if it cannot work with others. It is very desirable to bring the Senate into consideration.
Prof. Hennessy: To conduct a study, which is a Senate function, permits it taking part.
Pres. Halkola: An ultimate confrontation can occur through article (b). Recommendation to President Smith of certain action is perfectly in order.
Dr. Bredekamp: Recommendation of action should go to the President.
Prof. Price: Arrangement with the Faculty Association when made by the Senate can be presented for approval.
Prof. Hamilton: The IFA is an important organization. Other school's Senates are involved and so should ours be.
Prof. Bayer: Can see advantages in such association.
Dr. Bredekamp: President Smith won't approve placing money at Senate disposal.
Prof. Price: Other Senates raise funds.
Dr. Heldt: Reluctant to endorse a remote body to speak for Tech.
The vote was taken by show of hands: 6 Yes, 9 Opposed. The motion failed.
Prof. Price then read Resolution II.
RESOLVED: That an ad hoc committee of the MTU Senate be appointed to recommend procedures for setting up a standing grievance committee which shall (1) comprise none of the members of the Committee on Academic Tenure; (2) Be representative of faculty and administrative points of view; (3) When properly invoked, shall function, after other appropriate means of redress have been exhausted, so as to endeavor to reconcile serious conflicts that may arise among the faculty or between faculty members and others.
Prof. Price moved, Dr. Pollock seconded, acceptance of this resolution. Discussion followed.
Prof. Price: The Tenure Committee now deals with problems of dismissals, holds hearings, etc. Conflict of interest is involved. The AAUP recommends such a grievance group.
Dr. Kenny: Do other schools have grievance committees?
Prof. Price: They do.
The vote was taken by show of hands. 15 Yes, 2 No. Motion passed.
It is suggested by the Tenure Committee of MTU that the Senate of MTU adopt the following code of professional ethics as a guide for the faculty at MTU and as a proposed basis for a definition of responsibilities upon which tenure at MTU should depend.
1966 AAUP Statement of Professional Ethics
Dr. Bredekamp moved, second was given, and it was passed by vote that the Senate President appoint an ad hoc committee to correct the election procedure and other documents of the Senate on the basis of the Faculty Definition Report.
Prof. Hamilton moved that place be provided on the next meeting agenda for discussion of ways to correct habitual Senate absences if efforts to be made by the Secretary failed. This was seconded and passed by vote.
Senate President Halkola requested suggestions for committee members be forwarded to him.
Prof. Price pointed out that the Senate in voting down Resolution I has placed the responsibility for continuing Tech's membership in the IFA with the Faculty Association.
The Senate adjourned at 9:41 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
G.W. Boyd, Senate Secretary