Approved Voice vote FS #6
02/17/11
INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY
FACULTY SENATE
JANUARY 20, 2011, 3:30 p.m.
HMSU DEDE III
Present: S. Lamb, A. Anderson, K. Bolinger, J. Buffington, N. Corey, C. Crowder,
R. Dunbar, R. Goldbort, R. Guell, L. Hall, T. Hawkins, C. Hoffman, J. Hughes,
L. Kahanov, C. Klarner, J. Kuhlman, J. Latimer, M. Lewandowski, C.Lunce,
R. Osborn, W. Redmond, T. Sawyer, M. Schafer, R. Schneirov, V. Sheets,
G. Stachokas, B. Yousif
Deans:A. Comer, J. Gatrell, J. Murray, B. Sims, B. Williams
Absent:B. Corcoran, W. Cambell, J. Conant, D. Hantzis, P. Hightower, N. Hopkins,
K. Kincade, C. MacDonald, S. Shure, L. Tinnerman
Ex offico: Provost J. Maynard
Guests:M. A. Badar, R. English, B. Brett, E. Kinley, L. Maule, R. Schramm (ROTC) M. Shahhasseini (AETM)
I.Memorial Resolutions
a.Judith Campbell read by J. Kuhlman
b.William G. Wert read by W. Brett
c.James Tyson read by N. Corey
All accepted unanimously– Voice Vote
II.Administrative report
Provost Maynard:
a.President Bradley sends his apologies that he cannot attend today’s Senate meeting due to other important administrative meetings.
b.Official enrollment data came out earlier this week. We are very pleased with our enrollment data. University enrollment is up 1000 students (10.2%) for the spring semester. International enrollment is up 11.5% (about 57 students). Returning student enrollment is up about 11% due to Student Success program, and we are very pleased with that. Overall, in about every category in the University, the numbers were positive comparedto the same date last year. The majority of new students are going into the College of Technology or the College of Health and Human Services.
c.The Indiana Commission of Higher Education has recommended approximately a $1.9 million decrease in allocations to Indiana State. The Ways and MeansCommittee and the Senate will also make further recommendations. ISU is expecting to be impacted somewhere between $2 million and $4 million. On the campus we are beginning formal discussions of our budget reallocation process.
Tomorrow morning (Friday) we will hold our first budget planning session with the president’s cabinet, members of the Faculty Senate, and the Executive Leadership team in attendance. The Vice Presidents will respond to how they will react to internal budget reallocations. ..then Academic Affairs will present its response. The overall target for the campus is approximately $1.2 million to be reallocated internally to support strategic priorities. The Academic Affairs target is approximately $550,000 of that. The deans, associate vice presidents of Academic Affairs,and I have been meeting for the last couple of weeks discussing how we might respond. We have said consistently that these reallocations will not come from the instructional budget. No faculty lineswill be impacted. It does affect all other dollars. At this point in time, if the budget is reduced no more that $4 million, we think that this will be the extent of any reallocation. We are not planning on any other reallocations other than the $1.2 million.
III.Chair report S. Lamb – No formal report
IV.Support Staff Council – no report
V.SGA report
Megan Bowers:
With Blue Crew we had the "Black Out" game for the men'sbasketball team, and it was a huge success with almost 2,000 students coming out to support. We are going totry to focus attention on the "Think Pink" game for the women's basketball team to get students to go support them as well.
Student Media Services (SMS) will be fully running by Feb 1st and help to provide student organizations with different advertising and marketing methods.
We passed the governing documents and are now working on the by-laws
We are continuing with the SGA Awareness Campaign to help students become more aware of who we are, what we do, and different events on campus.
VI. Special Purpose Advocate report. No report
VII.V. Sheets – Outcome of the Constitutional Elections – The Chair of FAC is still reviewing the work. One of the amendments required that FAC will audit election processes.
I had 398 faculty names from Academic Affairs, to whom ballots were sent. 239 completed at least partial ballots. At 60% of the faculty voting,I believe this is the highest faculty “turnout” we have had in a long time. The rules for a constitution changenot just a majority vote but 40% of the faculty body hasto endorse a proposal and, by my calculation,every one of the amendments that was proposed and approved by the Senate did indeed get enough endorsement to be passed. Assuming that the Faculty Affairs Chair confirms that, those will be forwarded to the Board of Trustees forapprovalinaddition totheHandbook.
S. Lamb: I have asked Bob Guell to assure that this entire set of constitutional changes as well as other changes to the Handbookare carried forward to the Board of Trustees, and end up in the next revision to the Handbook.
R. Guell: I have contacted Melony Sacopulos and will send her the package.
S. Lamb: Some Constitutional items which passed through the Senate last year and went through the complete process have not yet been incorporated into the Handbook. This is a continuing problem.
VIII.Approval of the Faculty Senate Minutes of December 16, 2010(as amended)
(T. Sawyer/M. Schafer) 29-0-0.
IX.15 Minute Open Discussion
a.N. Corey: I am somewhat taken aback by the advising scores on faculty questionnaires (regarding likes and dislikes, the 1-5 scale) especially in light of higher enrollment and how this will impact retention. I would like to understand why ISU is so poor in the area of advising.
Provost: I have not seen that report, but my guess is that it would only be referring to undergraduates (most research is targeted towards under graduate, not graduate students.) In reference to this - our students have consistently been on the weaker side for years. If Jennifer Boothby[Schriver] was present at today’s meeting, she would be able to discuss this matter in greater detail. But clearly we recognize that this is an issue that we need to respond to. Each of the colleges has worked on advisement in a variety of ways, using different models. I do acknowledge that we have considerable room for improvement, but again, I have not seen the exact data which you are referring to.
R. Goldbort: How many transfer students/coming in as freshmen do we have?
Provost: The new students coming in this spring are a total of 132 new freshmen. I can’t tell you the colleges, and 325 transfer students came in. I can’t give you the breakdown right now. That increase also reflects returning students' growth in fall plus new students.
b.R. Guell: Founders Day Event – kick off for March On campaign - I would encourage my colleagues on the Faculty Senate to continue to keep our students in mind when you are allocating/considering your charitable contributions.
c.L. Maule: Expressed appreciation of performance evaluationpolicy
document:
I am pleased by the outcome. I am equally pleased, if not more pleased, by the process. It was most pleasing to watch my colleagues on all sides of the issue(s) having a dialog about something that is so important to Indiana State University both professionally as well as for our students. I believe that almost all the points that were made - regardless of where a person stood on an issue, or how they felt about the policy, were civil. They dealt with the issues in such a way that there was disagreement about the policy - and not the people.
I really appreciate that the governing process (having been a faculty member at ISU for 15 years) was transparent and well done. There were some comments made indicating intent on the part of the Faculty Senate (FS) or Executive Committee (EC) to go against the will of faculty; or not to serve the best interest of faculty; or maybe even to be in the pocket of the administration. What I want from FS and EC, and what I have seen (most of the time) for the past several years is a body that is ethical; a body that advocates for faculty and students’ interest - Indiana State’s interest. It is a body that pushes back when there are initiatives/policies that are wrongheaded. I see that happening with the Faculty Senate as a body and with the Executive Committee as a body. What I don’t want to do is return to the years when I was on the Faculty Senate and when I was part of this governing process where it wasn’t just skepticism - it wasn’t just advocacy - it wasn’t just pushing back passionately when we thought something was going in the wrong direction. But it was a level of adversity that characterized people as being against us or on the dark side.
So what I want to say to the vast majority of you: Bravo to you! You took us into discussions that were civil, sophisticated and where it made me proud to be a faculty member. And, thank you to the Executive Committee for not only standing up for faculty rights when you had to - but working collaboratively and collegially with the administration in solving the problems we were faced with and making Indiana State University the best university that it can possibly be.
X.Emeritus/Emerita – An HonoraryDesignation. MOTION REMOVEDfrom the table
(A. Anderson/N. Corey) – Voice Vote
Review/discussion/comments:
- Why are we having this discussion? What does it bring to ISU?
- S. Lamb: There currently exists no policy as to the process to grant Emeritus/Emerita status.The very lack of policy has lead to controversy.
- Objection to this proposed policy – nothing specified to what emeritus means. Time-line is artificial. If you are a faculty member and believe that you should have emeritus status, you should be allowed to make that case.
- Realize that there are no benefit to this proposed policy except status.
MOTION to SUBSTITUTE revised statement (T. Hawkins/T. Sawyer )
Modifications based on comments at Senate.
Tenured faculty members who have provided at least 15 years of continuous honorable service to Indiana State shallbe awarded the title of Emeritus/Emerita upon retirement from the university unless the immediate supervisor prior to the individual’s retirement presents significant cause for denial. In most cases the immediate supervisor is the chair of the retiree’s academic unit. The petition for denial of Emeritus/a status must be presented in writing to the dean of the college in which the retiree served and approved by the dean and faculty governance body of that college.
Tenured faculty members who have provided at least 10 years of continuous honorable service to Indiana State University may, upon nomination from the Department Chair, be awarded the title of Emeritus/Emerita upon retirement.
In truly exceptional cases, faculty members with fewer than 10 years of honorable service to Indiana State University may, upon nomination from the department chair and approval by the college dean and college governance body, be granted the title Emeritus/Emerita upon retirement.
Title Emeritus/Emerita would normally follow the regular professional title, as in "Professor Emeritus of History." Once emeritus status has been conferred, such faculty will be encouraged to continue scholarly pursuits and enjoy continued participation in University activities; they also will be offered laboratory and office space, as available, on campus. They will retain continued library privileges and ISU e-mail accounts. (Approved at Executive Committee January 18, 2011 – 7-1-1.)
MOTION to STRIKE third paragraph of revised statement(permits persons with fewer than 10 years to be granted the title "In Truly exceptional cases…") (R. Guell/C. Hoffman)- FAILED
6-22-1
Main Motion (Emeritus/Emeritastatus): APPROVED25-3-1
XI.Quality of Theses and Dissertations – J. Gatrell
Proposed changes to Graduate Catalogue (A. Anderson/T. Sawyer)
APPROVED– Voice Vote
Statement on Quality of Theses and Dissertations (A. Anderson/T. Sawyer)
APPROVED – Voice Vote
XIII.CAAC item: Major in Civil Engineering Technology (A. Anderson/T. Sawyer)
FAILED 12-12-2
Additional CAAC items:
1)Military Leadership Minor (J. Kuhlman/T. Sawyer)
APPROVED Voice vote
2)Change in Title from the Senior High-Junior High/Middle School education to the Professional Sequence Senior High-Junior High/Middle School Education. (C. Lunce/R. Guell)
APPROVED Voice vote
3)Title Change: Department of Educational Leadership, Administration &
Foundations to Department of Educational Leadership
J. Powers – Purely name change (J. Kuhlman/T. Sawyer)
APPROVED Voice vote
XIV.FEBC items
1) Eliminate cap on summer pay (30% rule)
Under Section 500 Employment - 505 Compensation in Hand Book,
505.12.3 Cap on Summer Term Pay.
Existing language
The maximum salary that can be earned during the summer terms is 30 per cent of the previous academic year base appointment salary of the faculty member.
2) Eliminate cap on contract research or sponsored instructional
Activities
Under Section III – Faculty & Academics Policies: (20% Rule)
Existing Language
Time spent on contract research or sponsored instructional activities will be reimbursed to the University out of contract funds, and the faculty member will normally be paid no more than the amount of his/her established University salary during the academic year, and in no case more than 120 percent of this salary when participation in such research or instructional assignment is added to the regular academic assignment. During the summer, a faculty member may earn no more than 30 percent of his/her academic year salary.
ELIMINATE BOTH CAPS: APPROVED(R. Guell/R. Dunbar)Voice Vote
Meeting adjourned: 5:45 p.m.
1