Wednesday, 19 September 2001, 3:00 p.m.

PHOENIX ROOM C, University Union

Presiding Officer: John Lyon, Speaker

Parliamentarian:    Professor Jerrold C. Rodesch



1.            Approval of minutes of UW-Green Bay Faculty Senate Meeting No. 8, May 9, 2001 (attached)



1.         Election of the Faculty Deputy Speaker of the Senate for 2001-02

2.         Recommendation on the 2001-03 Pay Plan (attached)

            Presented by Professor David Littig



 1.         Report of the Provost

            Presented by Interim Provost Carol Pollis

 2.        University Committee 2000-01 Annual Report (attached)

            Presented by Professor Jeffrey Entwistle, 2000-01 University Committee Chair

3.         University Committee Report

            Presented by Professor David Littig, Chair

·        Code Changes

·        Learning Experience





MINUTES 2000-2001


Wednesday, May 9, 2001

Phoenix Room C, University Union, 3:05 p.m.

Presiding Office: David Littig, Speaker

Parliamentarian:  Jerrold Rodesch, Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff



Greg Aldrete

James Coates

Howard Cohen

William Conley

Jeffrey Entwistle

Scott Furlong

Anthony Galt

Curt Heuer

Robert Howe

Harvey Kaye

Peter Kellogg

Theodor Korithoski

Sylvia Kubsch

David Littig

Dennis Lorenz

John Lyon

Jennifer Mokren

Thomas Nesslein

Gilbert Null

Mark Perkins

Kevin Roeder

John Salerno

Patricia Terry

Harriet Wichowski

Karl Zehms

NOT PRESENT: Michael Hencheck, Brian Merkel, William Shay, and Joseph Mannino.

REPRESENTATIVE: Sue Bodilly, Academic Staff Committee

GUESTS: Interim Deans Jane Muhl and Michael Murphy, and Associate Provost Timothy Sewall



1.  Approval of Minutes of UW-Green Bay Faculty Senate Meeting No. 7, March 21, 2001

The minutes were approved without change.



 In introducing Chancellor Perkins, Speaker Littig took note that the Chancellor was appearing for the last time before the Senate.  Littig wished Perkins good luck in his new position as President of Towson University in Maryland.  Littig further noted that during his tenure here Perkins had called on the university to affirm its vision and had energized us. 

The Chancellor thanked Littig for his words and stated his discomfort on an occasion that he had not anticipated just a few months ago.  He and his family have very mixed emotions as they approach their final Green Bay Commencement.  

The Chancellor then recognized the service of Professor Entwistle as Chair of the University Committee and of Professor Littig as Speaker of the Senate.  He presented them with tokens of the University’s appreciation.

Chancellor Perkins concluded by summarizing his recent decisions dealing with faculty compensation issues.  The discretionary funds provided to him will continue to be used to address compression issues.  Significant progress has been made over the past several years.  This year a lump sum of about $400 will go to each full professor.   The spread in salary by rank will be improved.   The next steps will involve examining compression by a review of salaries on a disciplinary basis.   

The Chancellor thanked all who have helped him in his work on behalf of the university.  The Senate gave him a long round of applause.



1.  Resolution on the Granting of Spring 2001 Degrees

Senator Null moved and Senator Lyon seconded a resolution to grant degrees to the students who have completed their programs in time for the Spring Commencement.  The motion passed unanimously.

2.  Election of the Faculty Senate Speaker for 2001-02

Senator Kaye nominated Senator Lyon.  There were no further nominations and Lyon was elected unanimously.

3.  Code Change for the Personnel Committee and the Committee of Six.  Presented by Professor Jeffrey Entwistle

The University Committee revised its previous draft resolution following Senate discussions and a  meeting of the University Committee with University Counsel Melissa Jackson.   Entwistle read the revised sections of the resolution.  The proposal will change current practice.  Members of all-university personnel review bodies will not take part at that level in reviews of faculty members of academic units to which they—members of all-university review bodies—belong.  The intention is to assure fairness and consistency in all-university personnel reviews.  The code at present does not do this, and practice has been inconsistent.  The University Counsel believes that the code should be changed in the manner the University Committee now proposes.  It will protect the university from the legal challenges our present system invites.

 Senator Furlong moved adoption of the University Committee proposal and Senator Kellogg seconded.  The Chancellor announced that he would not follow his usual practice of abstention from Senate votes.  In this case the matter is of sufficient importance and the motion so clearly needed that he wished to go on record in support. 

The motion carried by a vote of 20 in favor, none opposed, with three abstentions.



1.  Recommendation on the 2001-03 Pay Plan.  Presented by Professor Jeffrey Entwistle

Entwistle apologized that the University Committee’s proposal was not brought before the Senate in more timely fashion.  The Regents’ pay plan assigns one-third of the salary increase fund to all faculty whose record shows “solid performance” and one-third to merit/market judgments.  The University Committee recommends that the undistributed one-third be allocated on the basis of merit reviews, and that any such unit merit allocations not contribute to salary compression.   “Shares” or dollar amounts for merit numbers exacerbate the compression problem.   Percentage of salary helps maintain the distinction between ranks.

Senator Null thought that greater clarity was needed.  Why not specify in the resolution that merit money should be a percentage of salary?  Entwistle thought that was a good idea, but some units have other methods that they believe will not made compression worse.  We need to allow for unit discretion.  Senator Galt wanted to know if the Senate resolution would be binding or simply advisory to the units. 

Entwistle said that the Academic Deans and Provost could review unit actions and, armed with the Senate resolution, approve or disapprove them.

Senator Howe moved to suspend the rules to bring the item before the Senate for action at this meeting.  Senator Zehms seconded.  The vote being taken, the motion failed of the needed two-thirds majority, ten in favor, six opposed, six abstaining.

2. Collective Bargaining Resolution.  Presented by Professor Jeffrey Entwistle

The University Committee brought the resolution before the Senate with the intention of seeking approval to suspend the rules to move it to action at this meeting.  The next Senate meeting is scheduled for the fall, and Wisconsin state legislative deliberations will have been completed before then.   Because the substance of the issue is so controversial, it is important to note that the resolution is in support of the right to collective bargaining and is not an endorsement of collective bargaining as such. 

Senator Null asked what action, if any, the UW-Madison faculty have taken on the resolution.  Entwistle did not know.  We are entitled to act on our own.  Null then moved to suspend the rules to permit immediate Senate action, seconded by Senator Kaye.  The motion passed, 20 in favor, none opposed, with three abstentions.  Kaye then moved adoption of the resolution, seconded by Senator Heuer.  The motion passed, 19 in favor, one opposed, with three abstentions.



1.  Report of the Provost

The Provost offered some end-of-the-year reflections, identifying long-term strategies to position UWGB in the UW System in the foreseeable future:

He noted a number of achievements during 2000-2001:

He urged the Senate to complete its discussion of the pay plan as previously discussed in order to avoid worsening salary compression. 

The search for the Dean of Liberal Arts and Sciences has not yet been successful.  One additional candidate will be coming to campus.

2.  University Committee Report.  Presented by Professor Jeffrey Entwistle

The University Committee agenda over the past few months has included the following:

Entwistle concluded by expressing his appreciation of Chancellor Perkins, whom he imagined as an Energizer Bunny traveling across the United States.  Although we still have many frustrations as an institution, the Chancellor has finally addressed the issue of our student-faculty ratio.  He has changed our message.  We are no longer just treading water.  He has managed a dramatic change.  We owe him a lot.



There being no new business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:07 p.m.


Respectfully submitted,

Jerrold Rodesch

Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff


Faculty Senate Discussion Item #2, 5/9/01

Moved to Action Item, Approved 5/9/01, Document #00-7  






"The Faculty Senate of the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay requests that the legislature of the state of Wisconsin pass legislation granting faculty and academic staff of the University of Wisconsin System the right to engage in collective bargaining."


Faculty Senate Action Item #2, 9/19/01






The University Committee, in accordance with the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents guidelines, recommends to the Faculty Senate that Pay Plan dollars not distributed by the required 1/3 merit-market and 1/3 solid performance formulas be allocated according to unit merit judgments. 

The University Committee also affirms that unit merit allocations must not contribute to salary compression in any way.  


Faculty Senate Information Item #2, 9/19/02


Annual Report of the University Committee

The University of Wisconsin-Green Bay


Jeffrey Paul Entwistle, Chair


Last summer as I assumed leadership of the University Committee for the new academic year, the Learning Experience Planning Committee finished with a major planning effort involving faculty, staff, and students from all ends of campus.  It was therefore essential that lines of communication between the University Committee and the Planning Committee remain constant.  Therefore, it should not have been considered strange that I was often found talking to myself on a daily basis throughout the fall semester.  But seriously, the University Committee had many complex, energetic, and involved discussions throughout the year related to the Learning Experience Initiative and they were the healthiest discussions about academic life that I have ever had as a professional educator.  Teaching and learning were at the center of these discussions and the campus-wide discussions that also took place, regardless of unanimity of thought on specific issues, were healthy for this once innovative campus that had become somewhat complacent with a business-as-usual approach.  We deserve more.  Our students deserve more.  Our staff colleagues deserve more.  Let us not rest until we, the faculty, staff, and students of UW-Green Bay, have brought forward a message that cannot be ignored and that treasures the academic and social potential of this university as an essential feature in the region, the state, and the nation. 


Although there were times when it seemed that the breadth of the Learning Experience Initiative completely filled and often overwhelmed the UC agenda, it was far from the only business that the UC handled throughout the 2000-2001 academic year.  The UC examines a great deal of communication on behalf of University Faculty Governance that does not require Faculty Senate action.  There are also a continuing variety of reports and proposals that must be reviewed and responded to.  The following are examples of those items that added to a very active, sometimes contentious, yet always meaningful year.   


·         The UC reviewed and responded to a University of Wisconsin System/Board of Regents Proposal on Instructional Staff Titling Changes.  [Except for the UW-Centers Faculty Representative, all other Faculty Representatives and University Committee counterparts were adamantly opposed to this proposal which would have granted professorial titles to a wide range of Instructional Staff throughout the UW System.]  

·         The UC responded to the campus Report on Equality for Women in the UW System UW-Green Bay campus.

·         The UC reviewed and responded to Recommended Changes in Academic Probation/Suspension policies

·         The UC received a very favorable review from the Academic Affairs Council in support of the Graduate program in Applied Teaching and Learning.  The review strongly recommends, and the University Committee agrees, that this graduate program should now be placed on the standard 5-year program review schedule.  Additionally, due to increased communication between the UC and AAC, administrative proposals have received more scrutiny prior to implementation.

·         As you all know, the Faculty Senate voted down the Provost’s proposed change in the title of Dean of Professional Studies and Outreach and numerous UC discussions with and without the Provost took place prior to that Senate action.

·         The UC prompted a code change regarding the Faculty Athletic Representative (appointed by the chancellor) as having official membership on the Intercollegiate Athletics Committee.  [Apologies to Senator Furlong for waiting so long for the UC to take care of this essential detail.]

·         The UC prompted a Code Change for participation in Committee of Six and Personnel Council promotion reviews.


1.                  The UC reviewed and either approved or turned down various faculty status recommendations.

2.                  The process was successfully completed for two Named Professorships (Barbara Hauxhurst Cofrin of Natural Sciences and the Ben J. and Joyce Rosenberg Professorships) which were selected by Chancellor Perkins and to be announced publicly at the December 2001 commencement by Chancellor Shepard.

3.                  The UC continues to support recommendations of emeritus status to retiring faculty in staggering numbers.

4.                  Through Faculty Senate action the UW-Green Bay Faculty Senate joined many other UW campuses in seeking the right to participate in collective bargaining.

5.                  The UC continues to register concern related to faculty salary compression as the continuing rise in new salaries and the limited action taken by Chancellor Perkins was not substantial enough to solve the problem.

·         The UC developed a preferred list of faculty participants for the Chancellor Search and Screen Committee.  I would also like to thank Scott Furlong and the entire search and screen committee for their dedicated and successful work.

·         Once again the single most difficult item to coordinate is the successful scheduling of the Annual University Committee Photo.


The flow of activity demanding University Committee discussion and action will continue regardless of the makeup of that committee.  Since this report is my final official activity as a member of the University Committee I would like to take this opportunity to urge certain discussions and hopefully action on items that might otherwise lay dormant.


·         I would like to urge more regular contact with other Elective Committees.  The University Committee and Faculty Senate might also consider formalizing this process and structure even further.

·         Given recent state budget activity and the economic outlook, we will want to keep focused on those elements of the Learning Experience that will have the greatest impact on student learning experiences as we move to planning the next biennial budget.  Given the nature of the general education component of the Learning Experience, which is based on a parallel General Education Structure to what is already in place, I strongly urge a more broad-based discussion centered in the Senate and related to the “REAL” goals of a general education program.  More importantly I urge you all to think “OUTSIDE OF THE BOX.”  Don’t just place another control and analysis mechanism on the model already in existence.  For those who are not comfortable thinking outside of the box, please “SIMPLY EMPTY THE BOX” before participating in this discussion.

·         I would like to urge the faculty to communicate with Chuck Wilson and the Office of University Advancement.  An advancement office should have a greater connection to the academic life on the campus to think creatively in ways that might help support this university as it deserves to be supported.

·         Lastly, I would like to remind the University Committee members to remember their ideals and not just the need to get things done.


In closing I would like to thank Jerry Rodesch, Pat Przybelski, and Mary Valitchka in the Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff Office for their invaluable assistance and guidance throughout the year.  I would also like to thank all of my University Committee colleagues for their dedication and commitment to excellence.  As Harvey Kaye and I step aside after three years, I know that the University Committee is in very good hands as two of this campus’ most experienced and committed faculty leaders, Ilene Noppe and Cliff Abbott, are replacing us.  I would like to publicly offer my deepest thanks to Harvey Kaye for many reasons.  I thank him for reminding me to consider my ideals first before immediately thinking about compromise.  I thank him for constantly keeping the faculty’s interests in mind.  I thank him for his friendship and I am humbled by his intellect.  Now mind you, when Marshall McLuhan coined the “Medium is the Message” he had never met Harvey Kaye.  I can assure you all that if you allow yourself to get beyond Harvey’s antagonistic style there is tremendous value in his message.  I think the two of us could now have a successful future career as “Good Cop/Bad Cop.”  Thank you all for the opportunity to serve.