The University Senate

of Michigan Technological University

 

Minutes of Meeting 518

4 April 2012

 

Synopsis:

·         Presentation on  “Overview of MTEC SmartZone”  by CEO Marilyn Clark

·         Presentation on “President’s Address”  by President Glenn Mroz

·         Passed Proposal 11-12

·         Voting on Proposal 15-12 delayed until next meeting

·         Introduced new Proposals 16-12 through 23-12

1. Call to order and roll call. President Rudy Luck called the University Senate Meeting 518 to order at 5:30 pm on Wednesday, April 4, 2012. The Senate Secretary Brian Barkdoll called roll. Absent were representatives of Biomedical Engineering, Physics, Admissions, Information Technology, and Staff Council.

Recognition of visitors. Guests included Glenn Mroz (President Office), Max Seel (Provost Office), Marilyn Clark (MTEC), Keshon Moorehead and Eli Korttuen (Undergraduate Student Government), Bonnie Gorman (Student Affairs), Nakita Velat (student), Stacy Kukkanen (Daily Mining Gazette), and Jackie Huntoon (Graduate School).

2. Approval of agenda. Luck asked if there were any changes. Mullins asked to introduce a new proposal to form an ad hoc a committee to improve performance, reduce cost, and recommend a broad set of reforms to achieve these goals.   The agenda was approved as amended.      

 

3. Approval of minutes from Meetings 517.  Provost Seel proposed changes to SFHI numbers and Mullins to figures on finances.  The minutes stood approved as to be amended.

 

4.  Presentation:  “Overview of MTEC SmartZone”  by CEO Marilyn Clark

The MTEC Board is looking for a nomination from the Michigan Tech Senate to be on the Smart Zone board to serve a fiduciary role.  Clark went over the purpose, future strategies, and current Board members. Requires a faculty member to have a fiduciary role and indicated a preference for an engineering faculty.  Vable asked about senate selection process.  Riehl said the Senate approves a slate of nominees and transmits this to the president who selects one. 

 

 

5.  Presentation:  “President’s Address”  by President Glenn Mroz

President Mroz talked about the recent President’s Evaluation, stating that the response rate is up.  Key weaknesses were addressed. In regards to the lack of reward for good teaching, President Mroz replied that Deans and Chairs have a role, but that he is also aware of the issue and that teaching is used in promotion considerations.  In regards to declining benefits, President Mroz replied that benefits have declined throughout the country and that the state of Michigan has told universities that they will have to bear more costs.  President Mroz has met with Benefits Liaison Group to discuss these issues.  Health care depends on the upcoming Supreme Court decision.  In regards to swapping sick days for short-term benefits, President Mroz replied that many people need this for long-term illness.  Strengths pointed out by the survey included  representing the university, discharging duties, and that diversity has improved, Michigan Tech is going in the right direction, and that most people enjoy working at Tech.   Vable asked for comments on how last year’s comments were addressed.  Mullins inquired about the MPSERS status to which President Mroz stated that it is still as large expense to  Michigan Tech and that the Michigan Senate  is debating it.  Mullins asked about the status of the Next Generation Energy Center status to which  President Mroz replied that there is still discussion going on.

 

6.  Reports

a.  Senate President

Luck thanked chairs and assistant for hard work.  There are two meetings next time, one for electing new officers and the other for normal business. 

 

b.  Senate Standing Committees

            1.  Elections Committee

            Riehl stated that the committee held the constitution referendum, which Passed by 88% of those voting (287 out of 326 voted yes).  Nominations for a Senator At Large will close soon.

 

            2.  Administrative Policy Committee

            Caneba: went over results from the President’s evaluation.  Vable asked what the BOC does with the evaluation results.  Caneba stated that the results are forwarded to the BOC.  President Mroz added that the BOC does their own analysis.  Barkdoll asked if results are available to which Caneba stated that they will be available on the senate web site.  Scarlet asked if the results over time can be given to which Caneba agreed.  Luck pointed out that the response rate is different for various surveys and they have different questions. 

 

7)  Old Business: 

a.  Proposal 11-12 revised:  “Evaluation Procedure for the University Senate” (Voting Units:  Full Senate)  presented by Senator Madhu Vable

Storer  questioned the need citing that it was  more work and the abundance of  surveys.  Vable suggested that we try it and see if its helpful.  The proposal Passed.

 

b.  Proposal 15-12:  “Proposal to Revise General Education Requirements”  (Voting Units:  Academic)  presented by Curricular Policy and Finance Committees 

Storer stated that the vote will be delayed until the next Senate meeting to give units more time Clarifications were discussed regarding transferring courses.  Provost Seel said that the state would have to approve this and that the proposal has to be in line with the state’s policies.  Storer also discussed HASS list issues.  To Huckins’ query on whether the faculty need to vote on this revision Luck stated that they do not.  Gorman clarified a question from Bulleit regarding the number of Perspectives courses and the Composition courses.

 

 

8)  New Business: Luck: Proposals 16-12 through 20-12 will be introduced by Kampe and voted on next meeting.

a.  Proposal 16-12:  “Proposal to Ratify the Final Version of Proposal 25-10:  Guide to Completing a Graduate Degree and Preparing and Submitting a Dissertation, Thesis, or Report at Michigan Technological University”  (Voting Units:  Academic) presented by Dean Jackie Huntoon and the Instructional Policy Committee

 

 

 

b.  Proposal 17-12:  “Proposal to Amend Senate Procedures 101.1.1: Guidelines for an Academic Calendar of 14 Instructional Weeks”  (Voting Units: Academic)  presented by Instructional Policy Committee

 

This proposal would move the commencement ceremony to after finals week.  Vable suggested having study period between classes and finals (not for this proposal).

 

c.  Proposal 18-12:  “Proposal to Amend Senate Policy 301.1: Course Add and Drop Policy”  (Voting Units:  Academic)  presented by Instructional Policy Committee

 

This proposal would extend last day to drop to the 10th week of the semester to give a chance for evaluation before deciding.

 

d.  Proposal 19-12:  “Academic Calendar 2013-14 and Provisional Calendar 2014-15”  (Voting Units:  Academic)  presented by Instructional Policy Committee

 

Senate needs to approve. 

 

Mullins suggested having more break at the beginning of Track A summer so more students can take it.  Seel asked if the proposed calendar meets the new final exam policy.  Kampe said that it would.  Riehl asked if the provision for the latest day to have commencement after finals is needed to which Kampe replied there will be some years that would be later than the 21st.

 

e.  Proposal 20-12:  “Combining and Amending Senate Policy 302.1, 304.1, 309.1, 311.1: Course Grades”  (Voting Units:  Academic)  presented by Instructional Policy Committee

 

This proposal would define I and X grades so students and faculty don’t misuse them in addition to clarifying and combining  policies that deal with grades.

 

 

f.  Proposal 21-12:  “Amendment to the Senate ByLaws”  (Voting Units:  Full Senate)  presented by Professional Staff Policy Committee

 

Luokkanen stated that this proposal defines the Senate Representation units of professional staff.  Scarlett asked that the  proposed tentative list of representatives be attached to the proposal.  Luck agreed.

 

 

g.  Proposal 22-12:  “Proposal to Establish Committees to Recommend Guidelines for Communication Intensive and Global Learning Content of Courses”  (Voting Units:  Academic) presented by Curricular Policy Committee

 

Storer presented it to which there was no discussion. 

 

h.  Proposal 23-12: “Proposal to establish and empower a committee to improve performance, reduce costs, and recommend a broad set of reforms and changes to achieve these goals “ 

 

Mullins stated that there have been many suggestions to save money and that there be an ad hoc committee to examine these.  Valet asked why the existing Finance Committee or other ones be used instead to which Mullins replied that this committee would serve as a clearing house for suggestions.

 

9. Adjournment. 

Onder moved to adjourn. President Luck adjourned the meeting at 7:25PM.

 

Respectfully submitted

by Brian Barkdoll

Secretary of the University Senate