Synopsis: The Senate
(1) authorized President Keen to appoint an ad hoc committee to review the search procedures for University administrators.
(2) authorized President Keen to appoint representatives to a joint administrative committee to review summer session.
(3) elected Wayne Pennington to serve on the Vice President for Advancement and Marketing Search Committee.
(4) approved 2000-01 Senate committee assignments.
(5) referred Proposal 15-00 to the Senate Fringe Benefits Committee for further review.
(6) referred Proposal 23-00 to the Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Grievance for revision.
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
President Keen called University Senate Meeting
337 to order at 5:35 p.m. on Wednesday, 13
September 2000, in Room B45 EERC.
Secretary Pickens called roll. Absent were At-Large Senators Kunz and Adolphs, and representatives from the School of Business and Economics, Education, Mining Engineering, and Student Affairs and Educational Opportunity. Liaisons in attendance were Josh Bennett (USG) and Ted Soldan (Staff Council).
2. RECOGNITION OF VISITORS
Visitors included Curt Tompkins (President)
Steve Bowen (Interim Provost), Helene Hiner (Office
of the Vice Provost for Instruction), Ellen Horsch
(Human Resources), and Marcia Goodrich (Tech
Topics).
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
President Keen proposed adding a new item 4.
Remarks by President Tompkins and to renumber
the subsequent items. There were no objections.
[Appendix A. NOTE: Only official Senate and
Library archival copies of the minutes will contain a
full complement of appendices.]
4. REMARKS BY PRESIDENT TOMPKINS
Tompkins noted that he and Keen had met and
decided that the vice presidents would visit the
Senate one at a time to allow more lengthy and
focused interaction.
Tompkins distributed a list of over-, fully-, and under-enrolled programs [Appendix B]. He noted that quite a few programs are under-enrolled. The list, he believes, was used by the strategic planning group in the spring. The focus of Enrollment Management will be to fill the under-enrolled programs. Clearly, we do need to be concerned about the courses that students must take outside their unit, and make sure that increased enrollment can be accommodated. The BOC and Tompkins agree that fully or over-subscribed programs will have resources reallocated to them by the deans. There is concern in the legislature that MTU's enrollment pattern has not shown consistent growth. Freshmen and transfers are up 8% this year. He provided an example that, if we had a 10% growth rate in beginning freshmen over the next 5 years, we would have 900 more freshmen and 450 more upperclassmen. That would provide a 24% growth rate given historical attrition. He is not suggesting this scenario as a target, but only as an example of cumulative growth. He emphasized that we need to deepen our pool of applicants.
Tompkins received reports from Anita Jones [Appendix C] during the winter on information technology and Bob Nerem [Appendix D] during the summer on biotechnology. Both of these individuals were consultants working with the Washington Advisory Group (WAG). WAG has completed their contract with MTU. Nerem will probably continue, possibly along with some other biotechnology experts, as consultants. The strategic planning group used the report by Jones, which had some fairly direct suggestions, in developing their strategic plan. The strategic planning group is just beginning to integrate the information in Nerem's report.
Senator Pegg asked how much the University would be stressed if all of the under-subscribed programs were to be filled. Tompkins responded that he did not have a quantitative answer, but that he was aware that more students in the under-subscribed programs would put demands on many units across campus. Pegg also asked about the source of the program capacities reported. Tompkins stated that the targets were provided by the deans to Enrollment Management, and that discussions between the deans and Enrollment Management concerning the impact of new students on units other than their home department were ongoing.
Tompkins indicated that Keen and he had discussed the possibility of adding more PhD spinoff programs. Keen indicated that there are four such programs that have been through Graduate Council, with three or four others in the pipeline. Tompkins clarified that these programs will follow the usual process for new PhD programs, which starts with faculty recommendation, followed by Graduate Council, then the Senate. The administrative process then begins, and includes approval by the Provost, President, Board of Control (BOC), Council of Academic Officers in Lansing (the Provost presents it to that group), and final BOC ratification.
Tompkins reiterated that to make Carnegie's doctoral extensive category, we need PhD degrees granted in 15 fields, and that it would be good to have at least 20 fields offered to assure degrees in at least 15. Keen asked if our efforts to increase our Carnegie classification have provided increased state support to MTU. Tompkins responded that both Carnegie and state government have been providing a moving target for us to attempt to hit. He summarized the history of state funding to higher education, and indicated that he believed that our research productivity has helped over time with both general fund and capital project allocations.
Senator Ftaclas asked if the push to create new PhD programs would lead to new or reallocated resources and faculty lines for those programs. Tompkins emphasized that both new PhD programs and resource reallocation decisions should be made only if they support the strategic plan.
Senator Beck asked if MTU has a goal to meet Carnegie Doctoral Extensive in the next review in 2005. Tompkins said that it was basically a goal. Beck continued that it appears extremely unlikely that we will be able to reach the goal because current graduation rates are only in the thirties, and it takes too long to mentor a PhD student for students not currently in the program to graduate in time for the 2005 evaluation. Tompkins agreed that it would be difficult, but that the long-term goal is to become more research intensive. Beck suggested that we need to develop strategies that spread the message of our programs' quality. Tompkins agreed that we need to work on that, and summarized current efforts.
5. PRESIDENT'S REPORT
President Keen requested a moment of silence in
memory of Professor John Flynn.
Keen reported that Proposal 7-00, Tenure, Promotion, and Reappointment Procedures, have been examined by Interim Provost Bowen. The Provost's office is comparing the current version with existing policy, after which Provost Wray will act on the proposal.
Keen reported that the vice presidents will update the Senate at upcoming Senate meetings.
The Executive Committee will meet as soon as all committees have elected chairs.
Keen met with President Tompkins on September 11 to discuss the separation proposals (Proposals 1-99 - 4-99). He will also discuss the proposals and the comments from the University's legal counsel with Provost Wray. Proposed changes appear to be minor. The amended proposals will come back to the Senate for approval.
Keen requested Senate authorization to appoint an ad hoc committee to review the search procedures for University administrators. Members will include members from previous search committees and Senate Administrative Policy Committee members. There were no objections.
Keen reported that Vice Provost Bowen suggested changes to Proposal 23-00. The Senate will address this under Old Business.
Keen requested Senate authorization to appoint several Senate representatives from the Instructional Policy Committee to a joint administrative/Senate task force to suggest the summer session calendar. Senator Blanning commented that there were many other issues that need to be resolved dealing with the summer session. Discussion focused on the technical details of faculty compensation for teaching during summer session. There were no objections to the establishment of the task force.
The PhD spinoff time line is dictated by some calendar considerations, specifically the May graduation. Therefore, proposals must be ready for the March BOC meeting. The proposals must be ready for the December 11 academic officers meeting to be on the agenda of the March BOC meeting. To meet the December 11 academic officers meeting deadline, the spinoff programs must be presented at the October 5 BOC meeting. Senator Beck asked if they could approve them without a formal meeting, and Keen responded that the BOC was hesitant to approve them without a formal meeting. If the Curricular Policy Committee does not find obvious problems with the proposals, Wray will inform the BOC of their status at the October 4 BOC meeting.
Senator Hodek stated that he was opposed to treating new PhD programs as emergency proposals. Keen agreed that treating PhD proposals as emergency proposals is inappropriate for a variety of reasons.
The Fringe Benefit Cost Recovery Planning Committee has held two forums, and Tony Rogers will report on the forums and process later.
The Senate is seeking nominees for the Academic Tenure, Conflict of Interest, Faculty Grievance, Inquiry (Scientific Misconduct) and Sabbatical Leave committees.
6. ELECTION OF SENATOR TO SERVE ON THE
VICE PRESIDENT FOR ADVANCEMENT AND
MARKETING SEARCH COMMITTEE
Pennington MOVED and Hodek seconded the
motion to nominate Pennington for the committee.
Soldan MOVED and Hein seconded the motion to nominate Bruce Barna for the committee.
Snyder MOVED and Haapala seconded the motion to nominate Larry Davis for the committee.
Hodek MOVED and Blanning seconded the motion to close nominations. Motion PASSED with no dissent.
Wayne Pennington was elected to the committee by a secret ballot vote.
7. COMMITTEE BUSINESS/REPORTS
A. Fringe Benefits Cost Recovery Planning
Committee [Appendix E]
President Keen introduced Tony Rogers, Co-chair
of the Fringe Benefits Cost Recovery Planning
Committee (see web page at
http://www.admin.mtu.edu/hro/fringe/index.html.)
The group has held two open forums and a report to
the Academic Forum over the summer and early fall.
The increase in fringe benefit rates charged on
grants and contract of 57% for soft-dollar
employees and 38% for summer faculty were
announced early this summer, and this
announcement caused much concern among the
research community. Interim Provost Bowen
appointed the FBCRPC to investigate the various
issues involved. The overheads discussed by Rogers
can be viewed on the web page above.
A spirited discussion followed the presentation. Senator Beck suggested that, with a high fringe rate of 57% for soft funded positions, it would make a lot of sense to not charge overhead on that portion of the contract. Senator Ftaclas supported this argument, saying that the difference between the MTU rate and the other schools surveyed was about the overhead charged on the fringe benefits. Secretary Pickens noted that the nature of the rate studies was to include all plausible costs with the realization that some items will be disallowed by the Office of Naval Research auditors. Consequently, it does in some ways make sense to let the high rate be calculated but only charge a lesser rate, which the auditors will allow. Rogers noted that if overhead were not charged to fringes, then the overall overhead rate would increase because the established overhead to be recovered does not change. Interim Provost Bowen supported this logic, and also noted that MTU often negotiates a lower overhead cost. Senator Hodek expressed concern that the fringe benefit package is arbitrarily expanded like when the general fund employees were given season days between Christmas and New Years last year.
President Keen asked which of the presented scenarios were preferred. Beck responded that the option with the lowest fringe benefit cost was best. Ftaclas stated that the scenarios presented did not address a major part of the question, which is how to get the costs lower. He stated that he believed the appropriate question was how to get the rates low enough to be competitive with our peers. Tony Rogers responded that there were two ways to reduce the rates, cut benefits or provide funds to reduce the rates from another source such as the general fund.
President Keen suggested that the agenda be adjusted to move old business after approval of committee assignments then going to University committee elections if time allowed. There were no objections, so the agenda was modified.
B. Approval of 2000-01 Senate Committee
Assignments [Appendix F]
Lutzke MOVED and Roggemann seconded the
motion to approve the 2000-01 committee
assignments as presented. Motion PASSED with no
dissent.
8. OLD BUSINESS
A. Proposal 15-00, Health Care Premium Cap for
Medicare-Eligible Retirees [See minutes, page 8479,
for a copy of this proposal.]
Pegg MOVED and Lutzke seconded the motion
to remove Proposal 15-00 from the table. Motion
PASSED with no dissent.
Snyder MOVED and Blanning seconded the motion to refer the proposal to the Senate Fringe Benefits Committee for further review. There was no discussion. Motion PASSED with no dissent.
B. Proposal 23-00, Amendments to Senate Proposal
13-95, Faculty Grievance Policy and Procedures [See
minutes, page 8536, for a copy of this proposal.]
Ftaclas MOVED and Pennington seconded the
motion to remove Proposal 23-00 from the table.
Motion PASSED with no dissent.
Snyder MOVED and Prince seconded the motion to return the proposal to the Ad Hoc Committee on Faculty Grievance for revision. There was no discussion. Motion PASSED with no dissent.
9. ADJOURNMENT
Lutzke MOVED and Hodek seconded the motion
to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted by James B. Pickens
Secretary of the University Senate