UW-GREEN BAY FACULTY SENATE MEETING NO. 10
Wednesday, 15 May 2002, 3:00 p.m.
PHOENIX ROOM C, University Union
Presiding Officer: John Lyon, Speaker
Parliamentarian: Professor Jerrold C. Rodesch
1. Minutes of UW-Green Bay Faculty Senate Meeting No. 9, April 17, 2002 (attached)
1. Election of the Senate Faculty Speaker for 2002-03
1. Faculty Status for Instructional Academic Staff (attached). Presented by Professor David Littig
2. Report of the Provost. Presented by Interim Provost Carol Pollis
3. University Committee Report. Presented by Professor David Littig, Chair
UW-GREEN BAY FACULTY SENATE MEETING NO. 9
Wednesday, April 17, 2002
Phoenix Room C, University Union, 3:00 p.m.
Presiding Office: John Lyon, Speaker
Parliamentarian: Jerrold Rodesch, Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff
W. Bruce Shepard
NOT PRESENT: Theodor Korithoski, Kevin Roeder
REPRESENTATIVES: Nick Kohn, Student Government Association, and Robert Skorczewski, Academic Staff Committee
GUESTS: Interim Dean Jane Muhl, Associate Provost Timothy Sewall, Director of Outreach and Extension Jan Thornton, and John Rumpel, Student Government Association Representative Elect
1. Approval of Minutes of UW-Green Bay Faculty Senate Meeting No. 8, March 13, 2002
The minutes were approved without change.
Planning for the capital campaign continues, with a target date of fall 2003 for its public launching. It will seek endowments for our first named chair and for scholarships, as well as funds for building projects. The biennial budget waits on the deliberations of the legislative conference committee. It is possible that the final outcome will resemble the Governor’s proposal, i.e., painful but manageable. The Board of Regents and UW System have made a strong case. UW-Green Bay took some flack for leading with an admissions freeze, but the Regents’ decision to establish a system-wide freeze endorsed our initiative. The search for a new Provost proceeds well. The candidates are meeting our expectations after thorough background checks. The Chancellor expects to move rapidly once interviews are completed so he encouraged prompt feedback from faculty and staff. Institutional needs and priorities should be emphasized. The candidates are strong. They have very positive estimations of UW-Green Bay. He was surprised that all five were still available, because they are all candidates for positions elsewhere. This alone speaks well of our reputation and potential. His formal inauguration as Chancellor will take place on September 20. This necessary ritual will emphasize faculty and student achievements and reaffirm our institutional values of community, diversity and service learning. And, of course, frugality. There will be no new medallion, and efforts to put an elevator in a one-story house have proven futile. The Chancellor has completed his initial get-to-know sessions and has drafted about 15 pages of notes. These can be consulted on the web. He invited feedback.
Senator Kersten recalled that the Chancellor had earlier said he was reviewing the UW-Green Bay budget structure. What has happened? The Chancellor replied that only half-measures have been taken this year. The budget process was underway by the time he arrived. He expects to establish bottom-up/top-down budgeting, strategic budgeting, not a linear process but one that requires constant interaction to make decisions within broad guidelines. He has discussed this with the University Committee. The budget process will be critiqued at the end of each cycle and it will evolve.
1. Resolution on the Granting of Degrees
Senator Abbott moved and Senator Kersten seconded adoption of a resolution authorizing the granting of degrees at the May 2002 Commencement. It passed unanimously.
1. Faculty Status for Instructional Academic Staff
Presented by Professor David Littig who stated that he was impressed by the complexity of the issue and the dedicated deliberations of the University Committee over several months. We clearly need to be able to recognize the contributions made by instructional academic staff to the institution. UW-Green Bay could not accomplish its mission without these colleagues. At the same time, the University Committee serves as a gatekeeper of instructional quality and has an obligation to protect the system of faculty tenure. It needs to maintain a distinction between tenure-track faculty and the instructional academic staff. The Committee proposes modification of the code dealing with faculty status for IAS:
· Faculty status should be conferred at the time of appointment, as a condition of the appointment;
· Executive Committees of hiring units need to define the duties and functions of positions and the expectations that go along with recommendations for faculty status (faculty status is to be a function of the position as posted);
· The three titles available for IAS positions--Associate Lecturer, Lecturer, and Senior Lecturer—should be used to distinguish faculty status positions: the first should not carry this status nor the obligations of it; the other two may.
Senator Galt asked if the three Lecturer categories had different salary structures. Yes, said Littig and Provost Pollis. Senator Kersten thanked the University Committee for clarifying this matter. He wondered if UW System title definitions could be modified, expanded upon. Littig thought that academic units could specify their requirements for each title. Senator Noppe noted that there are great differences among unit needs and practices. We need a code flexible enough to deal with this diversity. Senator Salisbury said that in the past she had supported making faculty status easier to obtain. Now she supports a tougher stand because of growing threats to tenure and our need to defend it and support terminal degrees as teaching qualifications. The new code requires units to think about faculty status before conferring it. Senator Heuer said he was unsure about using the Associate Lecturer title for IAS who did not want the responsibilities of faculty status. Does that mean they might move backwards in rank, with attendant salary consequences? Who decides this? Littig and Salisbury responded that units should determine appropriate ranks and job criteria. Provost Pollis noted that Associate Lecturer is not a title we have used. How will this fit? How is this title to be used? Senator Abbott said again that the hiring units will determine this. Classroom instruction without other duties might define the role of Associate Lecturers. Instruction plus curriculum development might warrant a Lecturer title, etc.
Senator Fermanich said that job postings should have flexibility, allowing units to decide the appropriate appointment for particular candidates. Salisbury agreed and added that terminal degrees could be made a threshold qualification for some titles. Senator Aldrete said that both duties and qualifications could serve as criteria. This should be clarified in the University Committee draft. Senator Galt pointed outthat UWGB 50.01 specifies that faculty status is appropriate for IAS "with training, experience and responsibilities comparable to those in the professorial ranks." Doesn’t this mean terminal degrees? Senator Kersten thought so. Senator Carleton asked if exceptions wouldn’t be possible. Yes, Kersten said. Abbott again insisted that the code should use general language, permitting units to make specific applications. We don’t need to spell out a procedure for exceptions. Senator Kubsch thought that language in code referring to "temporary teaching appointments" in UWGB 51.01 (B) should be changed to "Instructional Academic Staff."
Bob Skorczewski asked that if terminal degrees were to be included as a faculty status requirement there be a provision for grandfathering those holding the status and Lecturer and Senior Lecturer ranks. Even better would be no mention of terminal degrees, allowing units to decide. Senator Null said that the proposal has units deciding faculty status on a case-by-case basis. Specifying a terminal degree requirement would be inconsistent with this flexibility for units. Pollis said that she understands the proposal to define faculty status at the time of job posting when the responsibilities of the position and candidate qualifications are spelled out. Heuer and Littig agreed. Faculty status is attached to a position, not a person. Senator Fermanich repeated his request that job postings permit flexibility in the search so that faculty status could be decided at the time of appointment based on candidate experience and qualifications as well as duties. Senator Block thought that UWGB 51.12 needed clarification. Is a 50 percent or greater appointment meant to refer to teaching or working at the university? Salisbury said that teaching is the core activity required for faculty status decisions. Faculty status should not be available to non-teachers.
2. Report of the Provost
Provost Pollis, unaccustomed to having adequate time for her Senate report, was unable to fill the remaining hour of the Senate’s agenda. But she reported on:
· The search for a Dean of Liberal Arts and Sciences: there are four candidates and an appointment should be made in early May. The Associate Deanship is open. Pollis’ advice to the new Dean will be to conduct an internal search. MiLissa Stipe has been reassigned to the office of academic deans, providing greater support in that area. The new Provost and Dean will review the operational structure of the Academic Affairs area.
· NEWERA: the Northeast Wisconsin Economic Resource Alliance is a collaboration of UW-Green Bay, UW-Oshkosh, the UW Colleges and Technical Colleges in this region to increase cooperation. One of NEWERA’s goals is to increase political clout for regional institutions. Northeast Wisconsin did not do well in the last biennial budget. The project is in an early phase.
· Congressman Mark Green has proposed that we explore possibilities for the development of a Paper Sciences Technology Transfer Center to be located here. It is a very ambitious concept. Chancellor Shepard said that we have responded to the Congressman’s suggestion and have asked for $100,000 to plan what will need to be a regional collaboration, using, e.g., the existing Paper Science program in place at UW-Stevens Point. The center would focus more on applied technology transfer than does the Institute of Paper Chemistry, late of Wisconsin, now in Atlanta.
· Equality for Women Report Implementation: the Ombudsperson has had 84 appointments with 60 individuals (57 women and 3 men: 17 faculty, 23 academic staff, eight students, and 12 classified staff) seeking her advice on a variety of issues and problems. These resulted in 14 direct interventions and 32 referrals to other offices. The subjects dealt with included academic misconduct, dishonesty, ADA disability accommodations, age discrimination, faculty and academic staff grievance/complaint processes, the merit review process and performance evaluations, peer-to-peer harassment, racial discrimination, sexual harassment, tenure and promotion, work life, balance, flexible schedules, job sharing, tuition reimbursement, working conditions and environment, union grievances, hostile work environment, personality conflicts, etc. A web site will be developed and in place by fall which will post the full implementatio plan and report on progress. The Child Care Committee has struggled. There will be a report before the end of the semester. A different planning mechanism for child care will be used in future.
Senator Aldrete asked why no information has been provided about the scholarship and teaching experience of the Provost candidates. The Provost said that this was the decision of the Search and Screen Committee with respect to the material posted on the Web. Full CVs are available for review, and we can put them on the web if desired. Senator Heuer said he had served on the Search Committee for the Dean and it had made the same choice as the Provost’s committee. The Chancellor assured the Senate that the scholarship of candidates for both positions was impressive and he thought should be made available for public review.
3. University Committee Report
Committee Chair Littig said that the University Committee has:
· Reviewed the disparity of S&E funds allocated to different units, as requested by Senator Heuer. The Senate Budget and Planning Committee has done a preliminary analysis, and a report will be made at the next Senate meeting.
· Considered the request made by Professor Brian Sutton about the restrictions placed on faculty search and screen committees not to rank candidates. UW System Administration provided the advice that led to this rule. It is an issue on other campuses as well. Search committees efforts to communicate their evaluations in unranked reports have led to faculty quarrels with administrators elsewhere, in particular at UW-Whitewater where faculty claim that a dean ignores committees’ judgments. Lawsuits have been filed in the past when rankings were made and the hiring decision did not follow the ranking.
· Followed state budget deliberations, especially looking at the possibility that revenue shortfalls might affect the faculty salary package. While a basic 3.2 percent seems assured (tuition funded), an additional one percent is vulnerable. In this event, the University Committee recommended to the Chancellor that a 4.2 percent salary increase be preserved even if it means base budget cuts elsewhere. Promotions should be fully funded, if not immediately as soon as possible. Compression adjustments for full professors could also be delayed. In response to a question by Senator Heuer, the Chancellor said that campuses are provided advice to UW System on this question. There will be uniform guidelines for all institutions.
· Discussed ways to involve faculty governance more fully in UW-Green Bay strategic budget planning.
Senator Carleton asked that an issue confronted by the Academic Affairs Council should be considered: the role of faculty governance in approving articulation agreements. Last year the agreement entered into between Extended Degree and NWTC was presented to the AAC simply for its information. Deans have simply pushed these agreements through. There are other examples and this may be a problem that will loom larger in future. This clearly affects the academic quality of the programs UW-Green Bay offers, in particular our General Education requirements. The code should be clarified on this. The Provost said that the original Extended Degree/NWTC articulation agreements were approved by the AAC, and she agrees that such faculty review is appropriate and the only way to effectively pursue collaboration. There will be more collaboration.
The meeting adjourned at 4:39 p.m.
Secretary of the Faculty and Academic Staff
Faculty Senate Discussion Item #1, 5/15/02
Proposed Code Changes for Faculty Status
Following are the relevant sections of UW-Green Bay codification with strike-through passages proposed to be deleted and bold-faced passages to be added to current code. Following the sections from UW-Green Bay's code are relevant sections taken from UW-System's guidelines for unclassified personnel, which form a context for the proposed changes.
50.01 University of Wisconsin-Green Bay Faculty Defined. The University of Wisconsin-Green Bay Faculty (hereafter in this chapter called Faculty) consists of professors, associate professors, assistant professors, instructors, and such other persons as may be designated as having University faculty status. Faculty status for academic staff members with training, experience and responsibilities comparable to those in the professorial ranks may be granted by the Provost/Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, on recommendation of the interdisciplinary unit executive committee, and with the approval of the University Committee, for a definite term and may be renewed.
50.02 Voting Members of the Faculty. All members of the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay Faculty holding the rank of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or instructor and academic staff with faculty status are voting members of the Faculty.
A. Faculty appointments carry the following titles: professor, associate professor, assistant professor and instructor.
B. Temporary teaching appointments carry the following titles:
associate lecturer, lecturer, senior lecturer, laboratory teaching specialist, teaching specialist, athletic specialist, community lecturer, teaching assistant and those that carry visiting, adjunct, and clinical titles.
51.10 Temporary Teaching Appointments or Special Non-Tenure Track Appointments
A. Lecturers and Laboratory Teaching Specialists. Associate lecturer, lecturer, senior lecturer, and laboratory teaching specialist are titles for persons who possess qualifications appropriate for carrying out independent instructional responsibilities in the academic program of UWGB but for whom a tenured or probationary appointment is inappropriate. The individual may hold a full or part-time appointment on an annual, academic, or shorter term basis, or, in special circumstances, two or three years. These titles carry no tenure or probationary implications. Lecturers and laboratory teaching specialists are appointed by the appropriate Dean(s) on the affirmative recommendation of the appropriate interdisciplinary unit executive committee.
Within the guidelines from UW-System, the hiring interdisciplinary unit executive committee sets the distinctions among the ranks of lecturers and specifies responsibilities at the time of (re)appointment. The distinctions will include that: associate lecturers do not have faculty status; lecturers (no-prefix) do have faculty status; and senior lecturers have both faculty status and sufficient experience at UW-Green Bay to establish a record of high quality.
Note: The following paragraph from the Academic Staff Governance
Handbook 2.02(2)(b) applies to Lecturers:
Appointment as a lecturer on a one-half (50%) time or greater basis. Lecturers will receive a one-year appointment through the fourth year of employment. Beginning no later than the fifth year of consecutive appointment, they will receive a two-year appointment; beginning no later than the eleventh year of consecutive employment, they will receive a three-year appointment. All appointments will be fixed-term appointments and will be subject to all provisions (including notification periods) governing fixed-term appointments. This provision for multiple-year appointments will hold only for persons on 102 or predictable funding.
Note: the following notice periods apply to lecturers:
1 year appointment (1st & 2nd years) 3 months notice
1 year appointment (3rd & 4th years) 6 months notice
2 year appointment (5th through 10th years) 1 year notice
3 year appointment (begins 11th year) 1 year notice
All notice deadlines are prior to the ending date of the appointment. If an employee is notified earlier than the notice date, he or she still remains employed until the end of the appointment.
51.12 Faculty Status. Members of the academic staff teaching fifty percent
or more (14 or more credits per year or its equivalent)
be may be granted "Faculty Status" by the Provost/Vice
Chancellor, usually during the first year of an appointment
as a condition of an appointment to the rank of lecturer (no-prefix) or senior
lecturer. The designation is initiated as a recommendation from the appropriate
interdisciplinary unit executive committee to the appropriate Dean(s), who recommends
to the Provost/Vice Chancellor, who then must seek the approval of the University
Committee. Faculty status is conferred for the duration of the lecturer's appointment.
Faculty Status will continue with any renewal of the initial appointment, so
long as the conditions of appointment remain the same. However, both the reappointment
recommendation to the appropriate Dean(s) and the Dean's reappointment letter
will stipulate any continuation of Faculty Status. Any substantive change in
the conditions of the lecturer's reappointment will require a full-process reconsideration
of Faculty Status. Members of the academic staff who have been given faculty
status have employment rights under the rules and policies concerning academic
staff. In addition, they shall be counted in Faculty voting districts, and have
the right to vote for and serve on faculty committees, including the Faculty
Senate, when not excluded by the non-tenured nature of their appointments.
The job expectations of Faculty Status are determined by the interdisciplinary
unit executive committee by the time of appointment.
UW-System Unclassified Personnel Guidelines
Provides formal classroom or laboratory instruction in an academic discipline, either independently or under the general supervision of a faculty member. Effective delivery of instructional material, testing and grading are the primary duties of a lecturer. However, the degree of involvement in course and curriculum development, course scheduling, advising and subject matter expertise differs significantly depending on the prefix.
Associate Lecturer: An Associate Lecturer is one who independently teaches a course(s) subject to broad guidelines describing the scope of the subject matter to be taught and the topics to be covered. Effective classroom delivery, testing and grading are the primary duties expected of lecturers at this level.
Lecturer (No prefix): A Lecturer at this level has the experience and academic qualifications needed to develop and teach a course(s) subject to broad guidelines describing the scope of the subject matter to be covered. However, the specific topics to be covered and the degree of topic emphasis is left to the independent judgment of the Lecturer. At this level, a lecturer may be involved in various instructional related activities. These may include undergraduate advising, assisting in developing lab safety protocols, course scheduling, curriculum development, participating in departmental outreach programs or their instructional activities.
Senior Lecturer: A Senior Lecturer has extensive teaching experience and subject matter expertise in an academic discipline. A lecturer at this level has gained a reputation among his or her peers for demonstrably sustained superior contributions to teaching within a department or division. At this level, the independent selection, organization and development of course contents and instructional materials approaches used are expected. Involvement with committees engaged in supporting this development is typical. However, the direct delivery of instruction is the primary responsibility of this title.