The University Senate of Michigan Technological University

Minutes of Meeting 281

1 October 1997

Synopsis: The Senate

(1) elected Anil Jambekar (SBE) to the Academic Integrity Committee.

(2) elected Jennifer Slack (Humanities) to the Inquiry Committee (for scientific misconduct).

(3) elected Al Brokaw (SBE) for a three-year term on the Conflict of Interest Committee, Laurie Whitt (Humanities) for 2 years, and William Sproule (Civ. Environ. Eng.) for 1 year.

(4) elected Jackie Huntoon (Geol. Eng. Sci.) to the Presidential Commission for Women.

(5) elected Nancy Szofran (Library) for the Graduate Council.


1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
President Seely called Senate Meeting 281 to order at 5:35 p.m. on Wednesday, 1 October 1997, in Room 101 of the ROTC Building.

Secretary Glime called roll. Absent were at-large Senator William Shapton, and representatives from Army/Air Force ROTC, School of Technology, IMP, Academic Services-Non Engineering, and Enrollment Management. Finance and Advancement does not have a Senator or Alternate. Liaison in attendance was Ted Soldan (Staff Council).

President Seely announced that the next two meetings would be in Room 101 of the ROTC Building.

2. RECOGNITION OF VISITORS
Guests included Fred Dobney (Provost) and Bill Kennedy (Director of the Center for Teaching, Learning, and Faculty Development).

3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
President Seely requested that items 6A and 6B be switched so that Bill Kennedy could leave earlier. Nesbitt MOVED and Lutzke seconded the motion to approve the agenda as amended. The motion to approve PASSED on voice vote with no dissent. [Appendix A. NOTE: Only official Senate and Library archival copies of the minutes will contain a full complement of appendices.]

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM MEETING 279
Senator Pegg requested that the statement on p. 7079 "Senator Pegg stated that we don't need to abide by parliamentary procedure if the Senators don't want to do that" be amended to read "Senator Pegg stated that we don't need to be bound by the interpretation of other bodies regarding parliamentary procedure if the Senators don't want to do that."

Senator Suryanarayana requested that the statement on p. 7082 "...if all the salaries and wages came from the 53%, then why weren't all salaries increased by 4% of 53%, or about 2%" be amended to read "...if all the salaries and wages came from the 53% [from the state], which increased by 4%, then why weren't all salaries increased by 4%."

Williams MOVED and Nordberg seconded the motion to approve the minutes of meeting 279 as amended. The motion PASSED on voice vote with no dissent.

[Note: An additional correction to the minutes appears at the end of the meeting.]

5. REPORT FROM SENATE PRESIDENT
Senate membership. President Seely reported that a number of elections for Senate membership have been held and a number of vacancies filled. Plans for elections in the non-academic units are proceeding.

The Senate Web Page, coordinated by Ted Soldan, is progressing. Dennis Walikainen will accept ownership. The main task is to link the agendas, minutes, and proposals.

Proposal 13-97, BS in Computer Engineering has been sent to the Curricular Policy Committee [Appendix B] and will be sent to the Finance Committee. Proposal 16-97, Minor Degrees has been sent to the Curricular Policy Committee [Appendix C]. The Academic Policy Committee will be working on two items from last year (weather advisories; faculty service award).

Don Beck has agreed to replace Faith Morrison on the Inquiry Committee (for Scientific Misconduct) while she is on sabbatical leave.

The Officers met with the Provost on 1 October. In response to Seely's question, Provost Dobney reported that following closed session, the Board of Control announced that President Tompkins will receive a 1% salary increase. This is likewise the raise given to all administrators and fifth floor employees.

The Board has approved funds for three kinds of special circumstances. These include equity funds to be used to retain outstanding employees who have or could easily be given offers elsewhere (i.e., it is pro-active); funds for the lowest paid union employees that raises their salaries from about $13,500 to $15,500 (poverty level for family of 4 is $15,600.); promotion-based salary increases.

We will continue talking with the Administration about involving members of the Budget Oversight Sub-committee of the Senate Finance Committee in the University budget process as early in the process as possible. The Provost noted that as he visits each department he is already asking for their ranking of priorities. When he receives budget requests, he receives a stack of departmental requests that he must sort through and prioritize.

President Seely will be asking the Academic Policy Committee to start an examination of several issues related to retired faculty: 1) emeritus faculty -- titles, appointment, benefits, etc.; 2) policy regarding employment of retired faculty.

The Calendar Issues Clarification Committee is continuing to meet and is moving toward public presentations.

What the faculty may consider to be a well-examined matter may not appear to be so to the students and others. Both the students and the committee need to hear voices supportive of the change. There are currently student petitions and classroom visitations, organized by the Young Republicans, in opposition to the calendar change.

There also has been no discussion of the merits of the various alternative calendars: early semester, regular semester, 4-1-4, etc.

6. COMMITTEE BUSINESS/REPORTS
A. Student Rating of Instruction Update -- Bill Kennedy

Kennedy (Dir., Center for Teaching, Learning, and Faculty Development) reminded Senators that one purple faculty form must be completed for each class. He listed a number of general concerns on campus regarding the evaluation. Faculty ask if they should share their learning outcomes with students, to which he responds "yes." He pointed out that the comments and IDEA form items this year are only for your information; only the 5 core items will be shared with department chairs.

He stressed that he is trying to move administrators toward using other mechanisms to contribute to the evaluation of teaching. Exemplary teaching should be rewarded; however, few students nominate anyone.

The advantage to the IDEA form is that scores can be compared to a broad data base. He reminded Senators that all who are teaching (including GTA's) must return the faculty form by 10 October.

Senator Gale stated that faculty in his department had several concerns. First, they were concerned that they were compared to people teaching in other subdisciplines within business.

Kennedy responded that before there was no control for any factors [class size, student interest in course, subject]. There is some subdivision within business, but to make any more would make the sample size too small.

Gale asked what model we are aiming for. Should we be presenting a teaching portfolio? or outcomes?

Kennedy agreed that a portfolio should be part of the evaluation and that outcomes were a natural outgrowth of the current assessment process. He added that especially at tenure or promotion time, we should obtain the opinions of external reviewers. He recognized that some data could be harmful and could be used against teachers, but that is not the spirit of this process [the spirit is to facilitate improvement]. He felt that the instrument we have been using has been used poorly in the evaluation process.

Gale asked if other types of forms might be used.

Kennedy responded that he had preferred this instrument because it was faculty-driven and not profit-driven. Many instruments are cafeteria-style and therefore comparisons are null and void. This instrument brings attention to teaching and learning outcomes.

Gale concluded by commenting that it takes a long time for students to complete this form.

Kennedy stated that students tell him it takes about 20 minutes the first time, but that after that it can be completed in 10-15 minutes.

Senator Santeford asked how often faculty were required to use it and if it must be done for all courses.

Kennedy responded that the University requirement is for one course per term, but that individual departments may require greater usage. He added that students will get fed up with the 39 questions if they must do it often. It is even worse if a course is team-taught and students must do it for each or do it more than one time during the course. His recommendation is to do the 5 core questions and to do the 39 question set only once for a course.

He pointed out that the results must be considered only in a general sense. Scores will bounce up and down from one year or section to the next and the middle should be considered.

Vice President Soldan expressed concern that if a faculty member does not want to be evaluated by this form that person need only fail to fill out the faculty form.

Kennedy responded that it is up to the department to deal with that problem.

B. University Committee Elections
Four university committee nominations are still incomplete: Academic Tenure Committee, Ombudsperson Selection Committee, General Education Committee, and the Sabbatical Leave Committee.

In addition, members are needed for the Senate Ad Hoc Committee on Separation.

President Seely presented the slates of willing nominees for the remaining committees.

For the Academic Integrity Committee, nominees are Bev Baartmans (Math. Sci.), Anil Jambekar (Bus. & Econ.), and Craig Waddell (Humanities). Jambekar was selected by secret ballot, with 12 votes; Craig Waddell, with 11 votes, will serve if Jambekar is unable; Baartmans received 8 votes.

For the Inquiry Committee (Scientific Misconduct), nominees were Jennifer Slack (Humanities) and Madhu Vable (ME-EM). Slack was elected by secret ballot, 19:12.

Seely suggested that nominees for the Conflict of Interest Committee be elected from pairs, with Al Brokaw and Karol Pelc from Business and Economics, Dennis Lynch and Laurie Whitt from Humanities, and Jon Soper (Elec. Eng.) and William Sproule (Civ. Environ. Eng.) from Engineering.

Nordberg responded that his constituents had stated that they would prefer that [paired] method. There was no opposition to the suggestion.

Seely also suggested that length of term would be determined by the ranks of total votes for each of the selected candidates. Senator Gale asked if this method of ranking would be the policy in the future. Seely responded that it would not; in this case a whole committee is being formed.

Brokaw was elected for a 3-year term (22 votes), Laurie Whitt for 2 years (21 votes), and William Sproule for 1 year (15 votes). Lynch received 10 votes, Pelc 10, and Soper 13.

For the Presidential Commission for Women, nominees were Jackie Huntoon (Geol. Eng. & Sci.) and Carol MacLennan (Soc. Sci.). Huntoon was elected 19:13.

Seely commented that the Presidential Commission for Diversity did not seem to be active because there were no minutes or other indication that the commission had met last year. Senator Chavis responded that they had in fact met and that they did send minutes to the President. That committee will need 3 members, one from each of the schools (Technology, Business and Economics, Forestry and Wood Products).

For the Graduate Council, nominees were Allison Hein (IMP) and Nancy Szofran (Library). Szofran, who had volunteered to be a nominee, was elected by secret ballot, 22:9.

The committee for the selection of Ombudsperson must have three members: one chosen by the University Senate, one chosen by faculty election, one chosen by the University President. The charge of the committee is to solicit nominees and to evaluate them. The decision of the committee must be unanimous. A similarly constituted committee will review the ombudsperson in one year.

Vice President Soldan asked if the selection committee must define the function of the Ombudsperson. Seely responded that the function was already defined in the faculty handbook.

Seely asked for volunteers from the Senate, but no one came forward.

Seely announced that he wanted to complete the selection of committee members at the next Senate meeting. For the Sabbatical Leave and General Education Committees, the Senate need only approve a slate. Seely wants at least five persons from which the Senate can select three nominees to give to the President. He is having the most difficulty finding willing nominees for the General Education Committee. For the Academic Tenure Committee, the Senate approves the slate that will go to the entire faculty for selection.

Representation units: In looking over the representatives for each unit this year, it is not clear who should be in which units for IWR and IMP. Seely made it clear that the issue is not related to politics or to stature of any department or unit. Seely and Meyers can identify only 8 staff members in IWR. There is a potential at least for persons to be double represented in both the IWR and Forestry faculty units. In passing the Constitutional revisions, we have identified the research institutes as being able to vote on both faculty and staff issues.

As an example of double listing, Bill Kennedy holds tenure in the Humanities Department but is appointed in the Center for Teaching, Learning, and Faculty Development. Similar examples exist in Forestry.

Senator Williams pointed out that he has an appointment that is 50% in chemistry and 50% in chemical engineering. He was elected as Senator in chemical engineering, but Provost Dobney ruled that his primary department was chemistry. Therefore he had to step down as Senator from chemical engineering and was selected as the Senator from chemistry.

Senator Pickens stated that IWR is now one of two subunits; the other is forest ecology and management faculty. Thus there is no double representation within the department. Seely stated that Vice Provost Lee wondered if these will remain as separate units. Pickens responded that there is now a distinction with no ambiguity.

Glime asked if there are still members of IWR who are teaching. Senator Reed responded that there are.

Pickens added that IWR is now administering a separate degree program under one school.

Senate Assistant Meyers stated that the staff of IWR are still part of the academic unit but that is not the case in other units. Soldan asked if it wouldn't make sense to put staff in the staff unit, as is done elsewhere in the University. Reed responded that the staff hold such titles as research assistant professor and research associate professor, titles paralleling those of faculty.

Seely stated that the Senate will continue to ponder this issue; IMP is restructuring and this may raise additional questions relating to the issue.

Additional corrections to minutes of meeting 279:

Senator Walck asked for additional corrections to the minutes on page 7081 relating to the NCA accreditation. The fourth paragraph beginning "The accrediting commission..." should be changed to read, "The accrediting commission will decide in August if we will be re-accredited and the year of the next visit." The following paragraph, beginning with "The NCA task force..." should be stricken from the minutes; it is not material.

The additional corrections PASSED on voice vote with no opposition.

7. ADJOURNMENT
Nesbitt MOVED and Lutzke seconded the motion to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.



Respectfully Submitted by Janice M. Glime
Secretary of the Senate