AGENDA

UW-GREEN BAY FACULTY SENATE MEETING NO. 6

Wednesday, 18 February 2004, 3:00 p.m.

NIAGARA ROOM BC, University Union

Presiding Officer: Illene Noppe, Speaker

Parliamentarian: Professor Kenneth J. Fleurant

 

1.  CALL TO ORDER

 

2.  APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF FACULTY SENATE MEETING NO.5, JANUARY 21, 2004 (attached)

 

3.  CHANCELLOR'S REPORT

 

4. CONTINUING BUSINESS:

a.  Code Change for Open Meetings (second reading) [attached]

    Presented by Professor Clifford Abbott.

b.  Allowing Alternate Senators (second reading) [attached]

    Presented by Professor Clifford Abbott

 

5. NEW BUSINESS:

        a.  2004-05 Slate of Nominees for the Faculty Elective Committees [attached]   

            Presented by Professor Kari Beth Krieger, Chair of the Committee on Committees and Nominations

        b. Student-Led Courses.   Presented by Professor Clifford Abbott

        c. Requests for Future Senate Business

 

6. PROVOST'S REPORT. Presented by Provost Sue K. Hammersmith

 

7. UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE REPORT. Presented by Professor Clifford Abbott

 

8. OPEN FORUM: Faculty Status for Academic Staff [information sheet attached]

 

9. ADJOURNMENT

 


 

MINUTES 2003-2004

UW-GREEN BAY FACULTY SENATE MEETING NO. 5

Wednesday, January 21, 2004

Phoenix Room C, University Union

 

Presiding Office: Illene Noppe (HUD-UC), Speaker

Parliamentarian: Kenneth J. Fleurant, Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff

PRESENT: Clifford Abbott (ICS-UC), Greg Aldrete (HUS-UC), Denise Bartell (HUD), Forrest Baulieu (ICS), Derryl Block (NUR), Peter Breznay (ICS), Gregory Davis (NAS-UC), Sally Dresdow (BUA-UC), Aeron Haynie (HUS), Michael Hencheck (NAS), Timothy Kaufman (ED), Sue Hammersmith (Provost), Craig Hanke (HUB), Harvey Kaye (SCD), Michael Kraft (PEA), William Lepley (BUA), Steven Meyer (NAS), Steve Muzatko (BUA), Tom Nesslein (URS), Illene Noppe (HUD-UC), Gilbert Null (HUS), Ellen Rosewall (COA), Bruce Shepard (Chancellor), Linda Tabers-Kwak (ED), Patricia Terry (NAS), Bryan Vescio (HUS), William Witwer (COA).

NOT PRESENT: M. Jan Bradfield (COA), Anne Kok (SOCW), Richard Logan (HUD-UC).

REPRESENTATIVES: Mike Schmitt (Academic Staff Committee), Matthew Voigt (Student Government)

GUEST: Dean Carol Blackshire-Belay

1. Call to Order. With a quorum present, the meeting was called to order at 3:03 p.m. Speaker Noppe reminded the Senate that it is now operating under the new house rules passed at the December meeting, which explains the new agenda format for today’s meeting. It also means that proposed code changes will require consideration at two meetings, hereafter referred to as first and second readings. Other items on the published agenda may be disposed of as the Senate wishes. Requests for future agenda items may be made from the Senate floor as the last item of new business, although there can be no discussion in the Senate until the item has been duly announced on a future agenda.

2. Approval of Minutes of UW-Green Bay Faculty Senate Meeting No. 4, December 10, 2003. The minutes were approved without change by voice vote.

3. Chancellor’s Report

There are reports that students this semester have had to work to find the classes they need and that faculty workloads continue to pose challenges. Some funds that were cut in the biennial budget were disproportionately high in the first year and some of the cuts (particularly to adjunct pool funds) will be restored next year, which will help somewhat. The new budget planning process is underway. Planning documents for year two of the biennium will be turned in soon, followed by budget hearings in mid-February, and then there will be time for governance to engage in discussion of the Cabinet’s response. There is some confusion about the way in which the campus budget is determined by the State System. What is clear is that there are two numbers, an enrollment target (we must stay within a certain FTE range) and a tuition target (we have to generate a certain amount of tuition) that is the more important of the two. We have no problem meeting enrollment targets (increased retention rates have put us over), but we have real problems meeting our tuition target, which leaves us open to the possibility of being billed for the shortfall. The reasons include: with the exception of Madison, campuses are experiencing declining out-of-state enrollment due to tuition increases, now averaging $14,000/year for those students. By comparison, our average cost/FTE/year is about $8,000. Also a factor, part-time students subsidize full-time students because they pay on a per course basis. As numbers of part-time students fall, tuition income falls. System tries to reassure campuses that they will not come after tuition shortfall, but the concern is that they may. Over enrollment cuts the liability in half, but a tuition target readjustment would be

preferable since it would allow us to hire additional faculty to teach the extra students. There is no question that the campus is under funded, so efforts on our behalf will continue. The good news is that it appears that we will not be cut further in the current biennium. We continue to work to find ways to attract a more diverse student body. The way to begin is with a more diverse faculty and staff.

4. Continuing Business. Faculty Status for Lecturers. Five resolutions presented by University Committee Chair Abbott, were brought forward as a way to help the UC sort out the issues following the failure of the Senate to agree on changes that would have made a previous code change acceptable to the Provost, who refused to accept that previous version. What remains is the original code for 51.12, and the current resolutions are meant to determine what alternative, if any, the Senate would like to consider at a future meeting. The UC is trying to determine what part(s) of the previous proposal may have caused Senators to oppose it. Abbott responded to questions on the current code, on how a grandfather clause would work, and on what the UC is seeking from the Senate. Broadening the discussion, Senator Kaye said that he has heard concerns about the growth of positions with faculty status to the point where people are wondering whether faculty status outside the tenure track should be abolished altogether.

a. Senator Abbott moved (with second) adoption of resolution A, "Resolved that the Faculty Senate direct the University Committee to propose changes to 51.12 that specify three ranks for instructional academic staff: associate lecturer, lecturer (no prefix), and senior lecturer." Several expressed concerns about three ranks, including the Provost who believes the rank of Associate Lecture, sounding like a TA position, would be a detriment to hiring. Senator Meyer asked why have the Senior title rather than just one rank for all lecturers. Senators Null and Terry felt that two titles, Lecturer and Senior Lecturer were probably sufficient. The motion failed 0 in favor, 26 opposed, 1 abstention.

b. Senator Abbott moved (with second) adoption of resolution B, "Resolved that the Faculty Senate direct the University Committee to propose changes to 51.12 so that faculty status is linked to specific ranks." The linkage would be automatic. Several spoke in favor of the flexibility of the status quo where academic units decide both rank and whether to attach faculty status, rather than automatic linkage. A point of contention is whether the rank should be attached to a position (as it was in the code change that was not implemented) rather than to an individual (as it currently is). Another is whether a set of attributes and list of responsibilities should be developed for each rank or whether that should be left up to each unit to decide. Senator Kaye made clear that he finds the conversation a waste of time. If you want someone to be faculty, he added, create a tenure track position. Long-term lecturers make a worst-case scenario. Don’t water down the composition of the teaching faculty. If lectureships must exist, limit their existence to two years, after which the University must create a Faculty position. He wants the UC to bring that debate to the Senate. The motion failed 1 in favor, 26 opposed, 0 abstentions.

c. Senator Abbott persevered to move (with second) adoption of resolution C, "Resolved that the Faculty Senate direct the University Committee to propose changes to 51.12 so that faculty status is linked to responsibilities in a position job description." This would link faculty status to a position description rather than to the particular merits of an individual lecturer. This would not change unless the parameters of the position changed. But if that happened, wouldn’t the position need to be reposted? Senator Aldrete asked whether it made sense to continue down the list of resolutions on faculty status for lecturers before taking up Senator Kaye’s question about whether it should exist in the first place. Senator Baulieu believes it important that the Senate wrestle with this issue and that it may be that the discussion is beginning to come around to the question of whether or not we want faculty status to exist at all. The motion failed 4 in favor, 18 opposed, 5 abstentions.

d. Senator Abbott persevered further to move (with second) adoption of resolution D, "Resolved that the Faculty Senate direct the University Committee to retain in any changes to 51.12 that granting faculty status requires the approval of the University Committee."

Senator Kaye moved to table both resolutions D and E ["Resolved that the Faculty Senate direct the University Committee to grandfather current positions in any proposed changes to 51]. The motion passed 26 in favor, 0 opposed, 1 abstention.

5. New Business:

a. Code Change for Open Meetings (first reading). Presenting a proposal for code change, UC Chair Abbott explained the need to modify code concerning review for promotion and renewal at all ranks so that it conforms with the State open meeting laws. It is his understanding, after consultation with legal counsel, that a committee going into closed session has a right to identify individuals it wants to include in its proceedings, such as a tenure candidate. The right to close a session must rest with the committee; and the intent of the proposal under consideration is to recognize that, while making it possible for the person under review to attend. Some of the discussion (Senators Terry, Baulieu, Breznay, Kaye et al) centered on whether it would be possible (as it is now) for a person under consideration to request a closed meeting, as has happened on occasion. The collective wisdom was that it is always possible to request either a closed or an open meeting, and that the University Committee should try to find a way to make that explicit in the text. The UC will return next time with a second reading that attempts to reflect this discussion.

b. Creating a Campus Climate Committee. UC Chair Abbott explained that the proposal is to appoint a committee of the Senate (composed of half faculty and half academic staff) to consider and test a variety of approaches over a year and report back to the Senate. The committee would be created as soon as possible and would not be limited to the six mechanisms suggested in the UC proposal. Abbott moved (with second) that the University Committee identify the people to implement the proposal as presented. The motion passed 23 in favor, 0 opposed, 3 abstentions. (One Senator had left prior to the vote)

c. Code Change to Allow Alternate Senators (first reading). UC Chair Abbott explained that this is brought to the Senate in response to a request made at the last meeting. Several thought this to be an excellent proposal. Abbott clarified that the intention of the proposal is to allow academic units to elect an alternate without obliging them to do so. The reason for electing Senators and alternates in November is to allow ample time to plan schedules so there is no conflict with Senate meeting times. Should a vacancy occur after that, there would, naturally, be another election.

With only a few minutes left until 5:00 pm, the automatic adjournment hour, a motion was made (with second) to extend the meeting time until 5:10. A two-thirds vote being required, and with 25 Senate members still in attendance, the motion passed with 18 votes.

d. Requests for Future Senate Business. Senator Baulieu made two requests: 1. "That the University Committee put together a proposal to remove faculty status as an option for instructional staff." 2. "That the University Committee look into and clarify the extent of the Provost’s veto power over actions taken by the Faculty Senate." Senator Breznay requested a discussion in the Senate of renewing campus subscriptions to anti-plagiarism technology."

6. Provost’s Report. Provost Hammersmith’s written report was distributed (see agenda). She added that student access to the draft Timetable has been cut off until the document is finalized. She also has a few comments on climate that she will sketch out and forward via e-mail.

7. University Committee Report. UC Chair Abbott said the UC is working on the student-led course issue following last month’s Senate discussion. They have not been able to find any extant guidelines. The Provost has asked the UC to look into how quorums are counted and what constitutes majority votes .

8. Adjournment. With no additional business, the meeting was adjourned by voice vote at 5:06 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Kenneth Fleurant, Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff

 


Faculty Senate Continuing Business (a), 2/18/04

 

CODE CHANGE FOR OPEN MEETINGS

 

Existing language in UWGB 3.08

1. Merit Review Procedures for all Faculty

c. Merit reviews will be open unless a closed meeting is requested by the faculty member.

4. Authority for Decisions for Renewal and Promotion at all Ranks

a. ... The review meeting will be open unless a closed meeting is requested by the faculty member...

5. Conduct of the Review for Promotion and Renewal at all Ranks

a. Review (whether required or by request) by interdisciplinary unit executive committees, by the Personnel Council, by the interdisciplinary unit professorial committees, or by the Committee of Six Full Professors, shall be open unless the faculty member under consideration requests a closed review.

b. The faculty member under consideration shall be notified in writing 20 days (25 days if by first class mail) prior to the date of review of the time and place of the review session and that he/she has the right to request that the review be closed.

 

Proposed change

1. Merit Review Procedures for all Faculty

c. Merit reviews shall be open unless the reviewing committee, in accordance with state law and proper notification, authorizes a closed review. The faculty member under consideration [may request a closed review, but whether granted or not,] has the right to attend reviews, whether open or closed.

4. Authority for Decisions for Renewal and Promotion at all Ranks

a. ...The review meeting shall be open unless the reviewing committee, in accordance with state law and proper notification, authorizes a closed review. The faculty member under consideration [may request a closed review, but whether granted or not,] has the right to attend reviews, whether open or closed.

5. Conduct of the Review for Promotion and Renewal at all Ranks

a. Review (whether required or by request) by executive committees, by the Personnel Council, by the interdisciplinary unit professorial committees, or by the Committee of Six Full Professors, shall be open unless the reviewing committee, in accordance with state law and proper notification, authorizes a closed review. The faculty member under consideration [may request a closed review, but whether granted or not,] has the right to attend reviews, whether open or closed.

b. The faculty member under consideration shall be notified in writing 20 days (25 days if by first class mail) prior to the date of review of the time and place of the review session.

Date of effect: upon approval by the Board of Regents

 


Faculty Senate Continuing Business (b), 2/18/04

 

ALLOWING ALTERNATE SENATORS

 

Current Codification

52.03 B. 4.

The district may not send proxies to any senate meeting to replace its elected senator.

52.03 B. 2.

The academic budgetary unit chairperson shall call a meeting to elect senate representatives for vacant positions in November of each academic year.

 

Current House Rules for the Faculty Senate

#6 Proxy, absences, subs

Senators may be replaced as per 52.05 for the remainder of their terms, but if a Senator cannot make a particular meeting, there shall be no voting by proxy or substitution as per 52.03 B. 4.

 

Proposed Codification

52.03 B. 4.

A district may elect an alternate for any of its senators and the alternate may attend and vote at Senate meetings that the regular senator is unable to attend.

52.03 B. 2

The academic budgetary unit chairperson shall call a meeting to elect senate representatives, and alternates, for vacant positions in November of each academic year.

 

Proposed House Rules for the Faculty Senate

#6 Senators may be replaced as per 52.05 for the remainder of their terms. If a Senator cannot make a particular meeting, there shall be no voting by proxy, but a duly elected alternate may attend and vote as per [proposed] 52.03 B. 4.

 

Date of effect: Senate elections of November 2004

 


Faculty Senate New Business (a), 2/14/04

 

February 18, 2004

TO: Voting Faculty

FROM: Kenneth Fleurant, Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff

SUBJECT: NOMINEES FOR 2004-05 FACULTY ELECTIVE COMMITTEES

The Committee on Committees and Nominations has prepared the following slate of candidates for open 2004-05 faculty elective committee positions. Further nominations can be made by a petition of three voting faculty members. These nominations must have consent of the nominee and must be received by the Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff no later than February 27.

THIS IS NOT A BALLOT

 

ACADEMIC AFFAIRS COUNCIL

5 tenured members: one from each voting district, plus one at-large member. 

Continuing members are Robert Nagy (PS) and John Lyon (NS), both 2-year terms, Denise Scheberle (SS) and Victoria Goff (AH), both 1-year terms.  Retiring member is Joan Thron (at-large).

1 to be elected for 3-year term from at-large

Nominees:                     Anthony Galt, at-large, SS

        William Shay, at-large, NS

 

PERSONNEL COUNCIL

5 tenured members: one from each voting district, plus one at-large member. 

Continuing members are Michael Hencheck (NS) and Patricia Ragan (PS), both 2 year terms; Georjeanna Wilson-Doenges (SS), 1-year term.   Replacement: Laura Riddle (AH), 1-year replacement term [sabbatical spring 2005]Retiring member is Cristina Ortiz (at-large).

1 to be elected for 3-year term from at-large; 1 to be elected for 1-year replacement from AH

Nominees:                 Steven Dutch, at-large, NS             Clifford Abbott, AH, (1-year replacement term)

                                   Lloyd Noppe, at-large, SS             Jennifer Mokren, AH, (1-year replacement term)

 

GENERAL EDUCATION COUNCIL

6 tenured members: one from each voting district, plus two at-large members (with no more than 2 from a single voting district). 

Continuing members are David Coury (at-large, AH) and Robert Howe (NS), both 2-year terms; James Marker (at-large, SS) and Marilyn Sagrillo (PS) both 1-year termsRetiring members are Jeffrey Entwistle (AH) and Ismail Shariff (SS).

2 to be elected for 3-year term: 1 from AH and 1 from SS

Nominees:                  Andrew Fiala, AH                         Kumar Kangayappan, SS

                                    Brian Sutton, AH                          Larry Smith, SS

 

UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE

6 tenured members: one from each voting district, plus two at-large members (with no more than 2 from a single voting district). 

Continuing members are Gregory Davis (NS) and Sally Dresdow (PS), both 2-year terms; Gregory Aldrete (at-large AH), 1-year term.  Replacement: Richard Logan (SS) 1-year replacement term [retiring May 2004].  Retiring members are Clifford Abbott (AH) and Illene Noppe (at-large).

2 to be elected for 3-year term: 1 from AH and 1 from at-large [NS, PS, SS]

1 to be elected for 1-year replacement term from SS

Nominees:                   Christine Style, AH               Forrest Baulieu, at-large, NS

       Denise Sweet, AH              Regan Gurung, at at-large, SS

 

       Mark Everingham, SS (1-year replacement term)

       Scott Furlong, SS (1-year replacement term)

 

 

COMMITTEE OF SIX FULL PROFESSORS

6 tenured, full Professors: one from each of the voting district, plus two at-large members (with no more than 2 from a single voting district).

Continuing members are Carol Emmons (AH) and Michael Morgan (NS), both 2-year terms; Michael Kraft (SS) and Ganga Nair (at-large, NS) both 1-year termsRetiring members are William Conley (PS) and Craig Lockard (at-large).

2 to be elected for 3-year term: 1 from PS and 1 from at-large (AH, PS, SS)

Nominees:                     Judith Martin, PS                    Timothy Meyer, at-large, AH

        William Conley, PS                  Illene Noppe, at-large, SS

 

 

COMMITTEE ON RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

5 tenured members: one from voting district, plus one at-large. Members may serve up to three consecutive terms.

Continuing members are Brian Sutton (AH), 2-year term; Fergus Hughes (SS) and Terence O’Grady (at-large, AH), both 1-year terms.  Retiring members are Robert Nagy (PS) and William Shay (NS).

2 to be elected for 3-year term: 1 from NS and 1 from PS

Nominees:                     Steven Dutch, NS                       Derryl Block, PS

                                      Brian Merkel, NS                        Judith Martin, PS

 

COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES AND NOMINATIONS

5 members of professional rank: one from each voting district, plus one at-large member. No member is eligible for more than one consecutive term.

Continuing members are Sally Dresdow (PS) and Forrest Baulieu (NS), both 2-year terms; Fergus Hughes (SS) and Kari Beth Krieger (at-large, NS), both 1-year terms.  Retiring member is Jennifer Popiel (AH).

1 to be elected for 3-year term from AH

Nominees:                      E. Nicole Meyer

                                        Jennifer Popiel

 

 

STUDENT AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

4 faculty members: one from each of the 4 voting district.

Continuing member is Michael Draney (NS), 1-year term.  Replacement: Two members resigned during the year and were replaced by the following faculty to fill the position for the remainder of 03-04 only: John Plier (AH) [2-year term replacement needed] and Dean Von Dras (SS) [1-year replacement needed].  Retiring member is Patricia Ragan (PS)

1 to be appointed for 3-year term from PS

1 to be appointed for 2-year replacement term from AH

1 to be appointed for 1-year replacement term from SS

 

Nominees:                     Susan Gallagher-Lepak, PS         Sarah Detweiler, AH (2-year replacement term)

                                      Robin Sronce, PS                       John Plier, AH (2-year replacement term)

 

Kim Nielsen, SS (1-year replacement term)

Kristin Vespia, SS (1-year replacement term)

 

 

GRADUATE FACULTY BOARD OF ADVISORS

5 tenured members: 2 members at-large elected by Graduate Faculty only. No more than one member from any one graduate program on the Board. No member is eligible for more than one consecutive term.

Continuing members are Denise Scheberle (at-large), 2-year term, ES&P, and Robert Nagy (at-large), 1-year term, Masters of Management

NO ELECTION NECESSARY

 

 

LIBRARY AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE

4 faculty members: one from each of the 4 voting districts

Continuing members are Kristy Deetz (AH) and Meir Russ (PS), both 2-year terms; Troy Abel (SS) and Debra Pearson (NS), both 1-year terms

NO ELECTION NECESSARY

 


Faculty Senate Open Forum, 2/18/04

 

FACULTY STATUS INFORMATION SHEET

 

There are approximately 80 adjuncts, teaching one or more courses. This number includes some individuals who are academic staff.

There are 36 academic staff with lecturer appointments, 19 of whom have faculty status.

Lecturers with faculty status are distributed as follows:

    HUS         6

    NAS         3

    ICS           3

    BUA         3

    EDU         2

    HB            1

    COA         1

There are none in the social sciences.

The rationale given for the faculty status of these individuals varies but typically involves their having expertise, experiences, or in some cases credentials, not available in the tenure-track faculty.

The typical reason that these lecturer positions exist as opposed to tenure-track positions is financial.

The responsibilities of these lecturers vary. Some are very active in a unit's advising, curriculum development, outreach, service, and governance while others play more limited roles.

In our codification, section 51.12 defines procedures for granting faculty status; 50.01 and 50.02 define the Faculty as including those academic staff with faculty status; 53.02 defines unit membership as including those with faculty status. The rights granted to those with faculty status are essentially the same as those of untenured, tenure-track faculty. The responsibilities of faculty status are not specified in codification.