Minutes of the Faculty Senate | Faculty Senate | SIU

Meeting convened at 1:02 p.m. by Peggy Stockdale, President.

ROLL CALL

Members present: Mark A. Amos, Terry Clark, Jon D. Davey, Stephen D. Ebbs, James S. Ferraro, Carl R. Flowers, Samuel Goldman (ex officio), Reza Habib (for Rebecca J. Weston), Philip C. Howze, H. Randy Hughes, Kathryn A. Hytten, Karen Jones (for Gary Apgar), Sanjeev Kumar, Mary E. Lamb, David A. Lightfoot, Douglas W. Lind, Lori Merrill-Fink, R. William Rowley, Mohammad R. Sayeh, Pamela A. Smoot, Gerald R. Spittler, Peggy Stockdale, Thomas H. Tarter, Brooke H. H. Thibeault, Matt Whiles, John Winings (for Joan M. Davis), Kay M. Zivkovich.

Members absent: Thomas Britton (ex officio), Allan Karnes (ex officio), Don Rice (ex officio), Russ Trimble (ex officio).

Members absent without proxy: Edward J. Alfrey, Joseph Brown, Michael J. Lydy, Cathy C. Mogharreban, Thomas A. Shaw.

Visitors and Guests: Jeff Englehardt (Daily Egyptian), Adam Testa (Southern Illinoisan), Marvin Zeman (Mathematics).

MINUTES

The minutes from the regular meeting on October 14, 2008, were corrected so that the Executive Council report, item 2, paragraph 9, will now state, "G. Spittler believes the Senate should be "hot" on the issue and would have the support of the non-tenure track faculty." Minutes were approved as corrected.

M. Amos moved to amend the agenda to include the Proposed Revisions to the Operating Paper of the Faculty and Faculty Senate under the report of the Governance Committee; seconded by G. Spittler.

Motion to amend the agenda was approved on a voice vote.

REPORTS

1. P. Stockdale reported she met with some Faculty Senators, as well as members of the Executive Council to continue discussion on changes to the Sexual Harassment Policy. She believes the meetings were very productive, and they were able to find more common ground. There had been discussion earlier about forming another ad hoc committee to review the issue more thoroughly; however, it was decided that the Executive Council would take another look at the policy in light of the survey responses that were received.

2. Chancellor Goldman reported: a) the last few weeks have been frantic in an effort to catch up on registrations and applications, as it was discovered that there were some difficulties in getting those processed. He commended Provost Rice and others for their work in solving this problem. His hope is that by Thanksgiving, applications and registrations will be processed faster and more efficiently. b) He has done some reorganizing in his area as a result of the heavy workload and has merged the offices of Administration and Finance to create the Office of Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance. Kevin Bame, formerly Executive Director of Finance, will shortly assume the vice chancellor position. Among his responsibilities will be the new construction projects at Southern Hills and Greek Row; the Arena renovations; new stadium construction and construction of the new student services building. c) Construction at Southern Hills is just beginning. There are concerns about relocating current residents, as those apartments are 80% occupied. Those decisions are a long way off; however, there has been discussion about moving some people to Evergreen Terrace. When the University's contract with HUD expires in February 2009, there will be room to place people in Evergreen Terrace. Again, those kinds of decisions are way down the road. Students are already paying fees for the student services building; that funding has been identified. The building will be located on the south side of McAndrew Stadium once McAndew is torn down. Construction will not begin until 2010 because the goal is to have the new stadium operational by then. d) The change in tuition rate for out-of-state graduate and undergraduate students will go into effect fall 2009. Enrollment of international students is down considerably, so a way needs to be found to reinvigorate that enrollment. Currently, tuition for internationals is steep, and he is looking at the possibility of reducing the rate. The financial shortfall created by reducing the rate would have to be made up in volume. e) He has been looking at the staggering numbers of Illinois students enrolled at Southeast Missouri State University (SEMO) and Murray State. There are well over 1,400 students combined at these two institutions. One factor may be that in-state tuition at SIUC is a little higher than what SEMO and Murray charge. He believes, however, that the University can attract students because its quality is higher than that of SEMO or Murray. SIU's higher quality will have to be promoted with astute marketing to show the quality differences between SIUC and its competition. e) The provost search has been suspended. The Chair of the Board of Trustees has agreed that the new chancellor should name the new provost. Until that time, Provost Rice will remain in the position. f) It is still unclear what, if anything, the state will do about a rescission. The University received 2.8% from the state and will likely have to return 3%. Funds are currently being held for that payback should a rescission occur. g) Spring enrollment is down close to 500 students, although there were some colleges whose numbers were up. According to Larry Schilling (Institutional Research), spring enrollment numbers can become predictors for fall. Work needs to be done to keep students here. Several things are happening with respect to enrollment and retention. There are plans for some new programs to come online if the University can get them; one is a School of Nursing, which will likely be done in conjunction with Edwardsville, though the program will be on this campus. Other new programs are being considered, but the main activity has to be with enrollment management and in the colleges. The deans are very aware there is a goal of growth, which means a decline is not an option.

QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION

1. P. Stockdale asked if the numbers on enrollment are reflective of the glitch in the processing of registrations and applications mentioned earlier. Chancellor Goldman responded that the Provost pulled all those involved together to do a lot of work to fix the problems. There were communication problems within the groups who are making decisions; work is being done to solve that problem.

2. K. Jones commented that her college (Agricultural Sciences) is one that is up in enrollment. They are faced with having more students than they can accommodate. She asked if there will be any opportunities to help and/or reward those programs that are doing well. Chancellor Goldman responded that the first place to look is internal reallocation. The data he has seen shows there is room for internal movement. For instance, there are many courses being offered that do not meet the guidelines of 5/10/15. Some may have good reasons for meeting with fewer students, but there are others for which the reasons are not clear. The second place to look--and he has asked the Provost to do so- is unfilled positions, particularly those that have been carried over for more than a year and do not look like they will be filled. A third option is brand new allocations. He is not sure there are such funds, but he will attempt to find them. He noted that the deans are well aware of this funding issue, and the first place they are looking is internally. He believes in several cases it can be done. There is no doubt that there needs to be some reallocation of resources in areas that may not be essential or needed. He is basically looking at issues of faculty assignments and the distribution of faculty load, using the 5/10/15 as guidance.

3. J. Winings commented that the University at one time had a nursing program [located at that time in the School of Technical Careers, now College of Applied Sciences and Arts]. Chancellor Goldman indicated that the demand for nurses in the area is very high. The proposal he is looking at, which involves Edwardsville, shows that in the first year, generally a sizeable number (approximately 40, he was told) will enroll. Nursing only takes about half of those students the second year; the University has enough options for the remaining 20 that would allow them to go into other health programs such as physician assistant. The hope is that the program will spin out to some of the other programs. He pointed out that the nursing program is only in the discussion phase. Ideally, he would like to see a 2+2 nursing program because it builds on the number of RNs and associate degree people in the area, which could substantially increase the numbers enrolled here for baccalaureate.

4. R. Hughes believes the 5/10/15 problem may be over-stated. He has examined some of the data and can see there are several kinds of errors that were made. He believes it would be good if every unit had a chance to review the numbers the Chancellor seeing. Chancellor Goldman responded that every dean has a copy of the data and is aware of what his office is seeing. Before anything is done, those conversations will be held. R. Hughes commented that he is not confident that every dean understands what is going on with the numbers.

5. S. Kumar asked whether the restructuring in the Chancellor's area is resulting in a new position (Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance). Chancellor Goldman responded the position though the name has changed--is the one previously held by now President Poshard; it was split into two positions when G. Poshard left. The load in that office will be very heavy. S. Kumar asked from where is the load coming. Chancellor Goldman responded [from his area]. P. Stockdale indicated she would like to see, as this is being worked through, an accounting of the FTE (for lack of a better term) for administrators when it was G. Poshard's position; how it was split up and how it is now coming back together again. She asked if the result would be a net gain in administrative positions. Chancellor Goldman responded he believes it is a wash because the former position was divided into two. It looks like an addition, but it is not.

6. P. Howze commented that the internal reallocation of funds sounds like a strategy for bill-paying of unfunded mandates (the signature programs, the first-year experience, etc.). Chancellor Goldman responded that the institution has problems, and unless they are fixed, the problems will continue and the University will spiral downward. If he does not intervene now to fix some areas, then it will be very difficult to climb back. The choices are to intervene to make something happen or just sit back and do nothing. He is aware there are individuals who are unhappy with him because of the issue of signature programs because they "don't want to hurt the feelings of those who don't have signature programs." He suggested that people think about the implications of that statement. The implication for him is that this concern with hurt feelings would move the University down to mediocre average that could impede its survival.

7. T. Clark commented on the interpretation of the spring enrollment figures, noting that in the fall, the main dynamic is incoming freshman, which represents thousands of brand new students. In the spring, that column of numbers is virtually empty. The action shifts to returning students. So, in the fall it is enrollment, and in the spring the University's retention problems are accentuated. Chancellor Goldman agreed, noting that as crass as it sounds, retention translates into income.

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

1. S. Kumar presented for approval the Resolution to Revise the Draft SIUC Sexual Harassment Policy and Sexual Harassment Complaint and Investigation Procedures (included as Attachment A to the Agenda). He turned the discussion over to M. Lamb who, along with P. Howze, has been leading the effort in developing the resolution. M. Lamb reported that of the 60 surveys collected, 17 were from Senators, and the remaining from the faculty at large. She noted 3 surveys sent in by Senators came too late to include in the survey results. M. Lamb reported that the Executive Council used those items receiving the greatest consensus to develop the resolution. She noted that the data from the survey, with the original questions, was provided to the Senate. S. Kumar pointed out that the resolution has gone through many changes over the last few weeks; it may not be the perfect resolution, but it is much better than what is in the proposed policies.

R. Habib reported that R. Weston requested a friendly amendment be made to part C of the resolution to remove the word "physical" so that it reads, "...an appeal shall be made only if the accused poses an immediate and direct threat to abuse any university employee...." R. Weston believes the meaning of "physical threat" is unclear because threats are not physical. If "physical" was meant to refer to a threat of physical abuse, then limiting abuse to physical abuse is problematic because in addition to physical abuse, research has consistently shown negative consequences of verbal abuse and stalking, including fear of physical harm. P. Stockdale noted that in its conversations, the Executive Council was asked to find the language that is used by the courts in granting a protective order. That language states, "if the individual poses an immediate threat to abuse...." The Executive Council added the words "direct physical" threat, although the proposed amendment would only move the word "physical." The friendly amendment was accepted by Council members.

J. Ferraro raised his continued concern as to why the definition of sexual harassment as defined in the proposed policy (number six on the questionnaire) is being used rather than the state's legal definition as found in the Illinois Human Rights Act. M. Lamb responded that question six did not have great consensus, though this does not mean that a motion cannot be made to make a change. J. Ferraro offered a motion to add the verbatim definition of sexual harassment in higher education as defined by the Illinois Human Rights Act.

M. Lamb clarified that the definition that was in the original policy is in fact identical to the second of the definitions that J. Ferraro provided in appendix 3 to the October 14 minutes, but with the addition of the phrase "other verbal and expressive behaviors." The issue of facial expressions came up under the examples that General Counsel provided. P. Stockdale indicated she would accept the amendment, noting there is a distinction between the definition in the policy found under Part 3 and the examples that are given, which she believes is where J. Ferraro is raising his question. She added that the sexual harassment working group also found problems with the connection between the definition and the examples. What they are attempting to do is suggest to whoever rewrites the policy that it is made clear that the examples given do not rise to the level of sexual harassment unless they meet that definition.

R. Hughes noted that the resolution does not address the issues of sexually explicit materials and consensual relationships between individuals with power differentials, which are not elements of the Human Rights Act. He believes there may be other differences between the Act's definition and the definitions in the original policy. M. Lamb agreed; however, the Executive Council took as its mandate to gather and respond to the surveys. On the issues of consensual dating and sexually explicit materials in the workplace, there was not serious consensus (to her disappointment). The Council took only those items for which they saw serious consensus; therefore, discussions need to now focus on those items. R. Hughes seconded J. Ferraro's motion to add to the resolution the definition of sexual harassment in the Illinois Human Rights Act.

M. Amos commented that other than those items that achieved consensus, there was no consensus on anything of the other questions. S. Kumar believes these are important points being raised, and suggested the Executive Council could discuss them and draft another resolution on the additions, if that is the desire of the Senate. P. Howze pointed out there are two types of resolutions contributory and binding. This is a contributory resolution, and the reason is because there are other groups are involved who are also submitting reports to the President and the ad hoc task force. None of it means anything unless it is bargained. Everything will come back to life again at a later stage. The improvements being presented are representative of those who returned the surveys, as well as of the discussions at Senate meetings.

C. Flowers commented that the resolution is only one piece of others that will have to be bargained/negotiated, and what the Senate approves may not end up in the final document. P. Stockdale agreed; however, she pointed out that the resolution represents the voice of the Senate. M. Lamb concurred, believing it is a strong voice that will have an impact. J. Ferraro believes this is the strongest statement the Senate will make. If another resolution is presented shortly thereafter, it will diminish the Senate's voice. Also, he believes that as an elected member, he needs to listen to his constituents, but he also needs to work in what he believes is in the best interests, even if it disagrees with constituents. He feels strongly that these issues are important, and he is comfortable with bringing up an issue that did not reach the consensus level on the survey. P. Stockdale noted J. Ferraro's friendly amendment is to add point B, which is the definition of sexual harassment consistent with the Illinois Human Rights Act; the addition would move everything down a letter. This was accepted as friendly amendment by Executive Council. P. Howze asked that a sentence be included to reflect that the passage of the resolution does not constitute an endorsement of the entire policy even if these changes are incorporated. The Senate is simply having its say. This was also accepted as friendly amendment. P. Stockdale called for a vote.

Resolution, as amended, was approved 21-1-0 on a show of hands vote. [see appendix 1]

P. Stockdale expressed thanks to the Senate and all those who worked on the resolution. It is her hope that the Faculty Association will work closely with the Senate when they take up the issue.

2. S. Kumar presented for approval the Resolution on the Faculty/Staff Ombudsman Position (included as Attachment B to the Agenda).

Resolution was approved unanimously on a show of hands vote.

GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE -- M. Amos, Chair

1. M. Amos presented for approval the Resolution on the Role of Faculty and Staff Consultation on Hiring Academic Affairs Administrators (included as Attachment C to the Agenda). He indicated a resolution was brought before the Senate previously, but the committee was asked to make additional modifications, which it has done. The resolution requests that the search committee guidelines initially approved by the Faculty Senate in 1976, and modified as noted, reflect that faculty members on search committees should have their opinions treated seriously; would like their reasons to be read and considered; and would like a report back from the hiring administrator as to what happened with those recommendations.

R. Hughes noted that item 4 in the guidelines should state that "faculty and staff shall receive general information...." S. Ebbs noted that in item 9, the statement "and current acceptable candidates shall remain in the pool" infers that at least two candidates were acceptable. He asked if there is a minimal number that is considered an acceptable number. M. Amos responded that, in general, [the administrator] has asked for a certain number of candidates. He suggested revising the sentence to read, "...any currently acceptable candidates...." S. Ebbs indicated that item 11 references item 4; however, item 4 does not address the issue of who is making the final selection. It was suggested that the words, "as in No. 4 above" be deleted. S. Ebbs also pointed out that item 12 states, "Once a decision is made, the hiring administrator shall meet with the faculty and staff..." He asked at what point when a decision is made does the hiring administrator make that notification--prior to the candidate being notified, or is the candidate notified and then the constituencies? Depending on whether a search is supposed to be held confidential for awhile, to discuss it internally before a candidate is contacted may raise questions or pose procedural questions. He questioned whether the phrase required some additional qualification. P. Stockdale commented that in the searches she has been on for administrators, the hiring administrator has come to the search committee to explain her/his decision before going to anyone else. For example, an administrator may select the committee's third choice instead of its first choice; it is their prerogative to do so; however, what is being asked is that the administrator come back to the unit and explain why s/he went with number 3 rather than number 1. It's possible that could be done after the decision is made. Usually, search committees are informed before the wider public. The whole unit or college may not be able to be informed that early, but they should be informed shortly after within a reasonable time. M. Amos suggested amending the sentence to read, "Once a decision is made, the hiring administrator shall meet in a timely fashion with the faculty and staff...." All amendments were accepted as friendly amendments by the committee.

Resolution, as amended, was approved on a voice vote. [see appendix 2]

2. M. Amos distributed copies of the Proposed Revisions to the Operating Paper of the Faculty and Faculty Senate (included as appendix 3 to the minutes), noting this will be the first reading of the revisions. P. Stockdale added that the revisions first have to be voted on by the Senate and then will be distributed to the faculty at large for a vote. Final approval will come from the Chancellor.

M. Amos reviewed the proposed changes, pointing out that the apportionment formula currently used to determine the number of senators from each college did not necessitate that the total would always come out to 30. There have been situations where a senator is lost because of rounding. There are 30 Senators who are allocated by this method and 2 from the non-tenure track faculty. He noted the committee wants to examine the latter issue next semester because non-tenure track faculty now have continuing status, which means they have a long-term commitment to the University. It would seem they should have more representation than just two. Currently, there should be 30 tenure/tenure track senators, and there are only 29. R. Hughes, a member of the committee, ran through four different scenarios for rounding. The one that seemed most fair is the Huntington-Hill Method, which is the method used to determine U.S. congressional numbers. M. Amos then summarized the proposed changes to Section II.A. which addresses the issue of electronic voting. P. Stockdale asked that Senators review the information and be prepared to vote at the December meeting.

UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION POLICY COMMITTEE -- P. Smoot, Chair

P. Smoot presented for approval the Resolution to Recommend Approval of the Addition of the Specialization in Health and Safety Management to the Bachelor of Science Degree in Technical Resource Management (included as Attachment D to the Agenda). P. Stockdale asked if the specialization would be resource neutral. P. Smoot responded that no additional resources would be required.

Resolution was approved on a voice vote.

FACULTY STATUS AND WELFARE COMMITTEE -- None.

BUDGET COMMITTEE -- T. Clark, Chair

P. Stockdale reported that the Budget Committee and UEPC have been discussing the issue of signature programs and will likely present a resolution at the next meeting.

COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES -- R. Weston, Chair

R. Habib (for R. Weston) reported the committee approved the nominations of S. Ebbs (Plant Biology) and D. Lind (Law) for the Search Committee for Interim Dean of the College of Applied Sciences and Arts.

OLD BUSINESS -- None.

NEW BUSINESS -- None.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

1. K. Zivkovich announced that "Art Over Easy 4" will be held on December 5. It is the Department of Art and Design's major fund raiser, held to match some endowments and also to raise funds for a new building. The department has never had a building designated primarily for Art and Design. She invited everyone to come and support the arts.

2. G. Spittler announced that the Flying Salukis took first place in the National Intercollegiate Flying Association Region VIII championships, a distinction comparable to the football Salukis winning the MVC.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 2:33 p.m.