BAY FACULTY SENATE MEETING NO. 1
19 September 2001, 3:00 p.m.
Officer: John Lyon, Speaker
Professor Jerrold C. Rodesch
Election of the Faculty Deputy Speaker of the Senate for 2001-02
Recommendation on the 2001-03 Pay Plan
Presented by Professor David Littig
Report of the Provost
Presented by Interim Provost Carol Pollis
University Committee 2000-01 Annual Report (attached)
Presented by Professor Jeffrey Entwistle, 2000-01 University Committee
Presented by Professor David Littig, Chair
UW-GREEN BAY FACULTY SENATE MEETING NO. 8
May 9, 2001
C, University Union, 3:05 p.m.
Presiding Office: David Littig, Speaker
Parliamentarian: Jerrold Rodesch, Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff
Bodilly, Academic Staff Committee
Deans Jane Muhl and Michael Murphy, and Associate Provost Timothy Sewall
Approval of Minutes of UW-Green Bay Faculty Senate Meeting No. 7,
March 21, 2001
The minutes were approved without
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.
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.
Election of the Faculty Senate Speaker for 2001-02
Senator Kaye nominated Senator Lyon.
There were no further nominations and Lyon was elected unanimously.
Code Change for the Personnel Committee and the Committee of Six.
Presented by Professor Jeffrey Entwistle
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
acceptance of the Learning Experience proposal by the Board of Regents, although it appears that funding it will not be easy to obtain; the campus needs to keep pushing it this biennium, the next, as long as it take
approval of planning for Campus Life for the 21st Century projects (including expansion and remodeling of the Union and the Sports Center); this should help our ability to recruit and retain student
approval of Laboratory Sciences remodeling
construction of Mary Ann Cofrin Hall, scheduled to open in the fall
planning way for additional campus housing
launching the National Nursing program
implementation of PeopleSoft Financial
Systems (the PeopleSoft Student Information System planning is under way)
installation of Office 2000 in fall
2000 and Windows 2000 this summer
revision of our admissions policy with a draft to be presented for governance consideration in the fall
revision of hiring policies and
practices to make searches more efficient
adoption of course scheduling
principles by the Unit Chairs and Deans to avoid conflicts
He urged the Senate to complete its
discussion of the pay plan as previously discussed in order to avoid worsening
The search for the Dean of Liberal Arts
and Sciences has not yet been successful. One
additional candidate will be coming to campus.
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.
Secretary of the Faculty and Academic
Senate Discussion Item #2, 5/9/01
to Action Item, Approved 5/9/01, Document #00-7
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
Faculty Senate Action Item #2, 9/19/01
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.
University Committee also affirms that unit merit allocations must not
contribute to salary compression in any way.
Faculty Senate Information
Report of the University Committee
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay
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.
The UC reviewed and either approved or
turned down various faculty status recommendations.
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
The UC continues to support
recommendations of emeritus status to retiring faculty in staggering numbers.
Through Faculty Senate action the
UW-Green Bay Faculty Senate joined many other UW campuses in seeking the right
to participate in collective bargaining.
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
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.