Minutes of the Faculty Senate | Faculty Senate | SIU

Meeting convened at 1:02 p.m. by Phil Howze, President.

ROLL CALL

Members present: Om P. Agrawal, James S. Allen, Mark A. Amos, Gary A. Apgar, George E. Boulukos, Marjorie Brooks (for Michael J. Lydy), Lisa B. Brooten, Joseph A. Brown, Sandra K. Collins, Joan M. Davis, Lisabeth A. DiLalla, Saran Donahoo (for Kathryn A. Hytten), Stephen D. Ebbs, James S. Ferraro, James E. Garvey, Samuel Goldman (ex officio), Eric Hellgren (ex officio), Philip C. Howze, H. Randy Hughes, Allan L. Karnes, Sanjeev Kumar, Mary E. Lamb, David A. Lightfoot, Douglas W. Lind, Marla H. Mallette, Cathy C. Mogharreban, Benjamin F. Rodriguez, Jose R. Ruiz, Gerald R. Spittler, Peggy Stockdale, Brooke H. H. Thibeault, Kay M. Zivkovich.

Members absent: Don Rice (ex officio).

Members absent without proxy: Edward J. Alfrey, Thomas H. Tarter.

Visitors and Guests: Jake Baggott (Student Health Center), Chris Glidewell (University Risk Management), Ted Grace (Student Health Center), Codell Rodriguez (Southern Illinoisan).

MINUTES

The minutes from the meeting on December 8, 2009, were corrected under item 2 of the Governance Committee report, the last sentence under the paragraph beginning, "J. Allen" so that it read, "P. Howze expressed appreciation for J. Allen's remarks, noting that the first tenet [italics added] of Robert's Rules...." The minutes were approved as corrected.

REPORTS

1. P. Howze thanked G. Apgar for inviting J. Baggott and C. Glidewell to speak to the question of what happens if a student should get sick or hurt while in class. P. Howze then introduced J. Baggott, Associate Director of the Student Health Center, who described the services of the Center and the Student Medical Insurance Plan. J. Baggott explained that the insurance provides coverage for students who become ill or injured and are in need of medical care outside of what is available at the clinic. If illness or injury occurs during the day when the Health Center is open, and it is not a serious injury, the clinic can generally accommodate the student. If, however, injuries occur after hours, the student insurance plan provides coverage for emergency room care, hospitalization, etc. It is a very comprehensive plan, with a $100 deductible, and pays 80% of eligible charges up to a certain amount; then, it pays 100%. Some students have their own coverage through their parents and elect to keep both insurance plans to avoid out of pocket expenses. J. Baggott indicated that if an injury were to happen to a student after hours, he would encourage [the faculty member] to call 911. M. Lamb noted that visits to the ER for non-emergencies could put students in a difficult financial position. Is there a way the University could cover those in-between cases? J. Baggott realizes that people sometimes make decisions out of a lack of experience or understanding, and generally those circumstances can be dealt with through the insurance plan. If it is something that is clearly not an emergency, then that could be a problem; however, that does not happen often. Also, if someone disputes a decision, it can be appealed.

The question was raised as to whether the Good Samaritan provision would extend to a faculty member [who attempted to help a sick or injured student]. C. Glidewell, Director of University Risk Management, responded that anyone acting within the direction and control of her/his position at the University would have coverage through the self insurance program. If a situation arises, and the employee is acting responsibly, then the person would be covered under the University's general liability insurance. Anyone not familiar with the University's insurance program can go to Risk Management's website, where it explains that those people who are acting within their responsibilities to the University are automatically provided general liability coverage (http://www.riskmanagement.siu.edu/).

2. Chancellor Goldman reported: a) spring enrollment is down [here], but it is also down at Eastern, Northern, Western and Urbana; so it is not a unique phenomenon for SIU. Additionally, over 1,000 students graduated in December. There are several actions being taken, with the hope that things will be better in the fall; b) a new initiative, Saluki Interactive, has just begun and is aimed at inviting alumni to help with recruitment; c) the North Central Accreditation (NCA) report is available on SIUC's homepage athttp://ncaaccreditation.siuc.edu/; d) graduation ceremonies will be held at Shryock Auditorium and the Student Recreation Center as a result of the ongoing renovations at the Arena.

QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION

1. M. Lamb asked when the library will again be able to purchase library books. Chancellor Goldman responded that he is meeting with the library dean later in the day to discuss that very issue. The issue is a financial one, and it will be worse next year. He has withdrawn the 2% and pulled all the carry- forward funds, but the University is still looking at an additional 2% levy. The state has provided enough salary funds to get through March, but it is month by month. The President is hoping to borrow funds in much the same way it is done by the K-12 districts. The state budget director has promised the University its money; it is just not clear when. The state has even offered to borrow the money on the University's behalf.

2. C. Mogharreban asked if there is a timeline for summer school course offering decisions. Chancellor Goldman responded that he discussed this with the Provost, and summer school will be funded, but with limitations (e.g., class sizes). The mission of the University must continue.

P. Howze clarified that there are three pots of money: carry forward that the colleges squirreled away; the 2% contingency; and the 2% rescission. Tied up in the contingency funds are many of the frozen positions, and he questioned whether any of those funds would be returned to the colleges that need them so desperately. He indicated that he is hearing stories of people having to get permission to use the photocopier, and that [office supplies] are not as common as they once were. If it has come to that across the campus, then it is a concern. Chancellor Goldman responded that he will certainly consider remitting some dollars in some of the really tough cases. He reiterated that it is all uncertain; there is no budget for FY11; [he] has been told to hold all those funds. The freeze will carry through to FY11, so next year will not be any better.

3. M. Lamb asked if Saluki Way is on schedule. Chancellor Goldman responded that it is on schedule. Approximately $11.5 million in contributions have been raised, and it is on the way to $20 million.

4. J. Ferraro expressed concern about the face the University is putting on the budget situation. On the one hand, he understands the legislature has to be [scared] into realizing how real the situation is for [SIU]; on the other hand, why would anyone want to register for the semester if they did not believe there was money to pay the faculty? Adding to that is the worst case scenario; what happens if SIUC does not receive its $13 million before the end of March? Will the campus close its doors? Chancellor Goldman responded that SIU will not close its doors. A. Karnes believes there is an assumption that faculty will continue to teach class despite not getting paid. He questioned why the University could not offer payout options to induce people to retire. It would be less costly to pay them for half a year rather than a full year. Under the plan being implemented at the University of Illinois, employees near retirement are being paid for six months, and then their position is left unfilled the remaining six months. How does that cost the University money? It would not be that many people, and there is enough money to do that kind of thing. Chancellor Goldman responded that the U of I has the resources to offer such an option, while SIU does not. He believes what will happen there is they will buy someone out and then realize those classes still have to be taught; they will end up paying as a result. He added that U of I is looking at tuition increases of between 9-18%. SIU is looking at either a 4% or 8% cut in FY11 because there is no more stimulus money. The hope is for a trade-off that if the state does not cut SIU's funds, then the University will not increase tuition; but both cannot be done. Chancellor Goldman indicated that it would still be a deficit, but it would not be as bad. However, the state has the power to revoke (by way of rescission), and that could happen. He noted that there are alternatives being explored. P. Howze added that the Executive Council is working to arrange a faculty meeting this spring with President Poshard. A tentative date and time of April 12 at 1PM has been scheduled. A location has yet to be determined, but more information will be forthcoming.

5. G. Boulukos asked about the status of the borrowing bill. Chancellor Goldman responded that the bill, which would give universities permission to borrow, has passed the Senate and is now in the House; so, it is moving through the legislature. J. Ferraro asked how much lead time employees will receive if they are not going to be paid. Individual employees will need time to handle their day to day fiscal responsibilities. A. Karnes commented that several years ago, the University went for a long period of time without a budget, and there was a question as to whether the state could pay. The local banks gave employees a kind of IOU; but, whether they would do that again, he does not know. He believes it would be good business for banks to not have people defaulting through no fault of their own (though there may be a cost). Chancellor Goldman believes the University's argument is very strong, and it goes to the statement that SIUC is the economic engine of this region; if over 7,000 employees did not receive a paycheck, it would be devastating. This is the message going to the legislature with as much strength as possible. He does not believe they can look away.

REPORTS (cont.)

3. A. Karnes submitted his written report on the Faculty Advisory Council to the IBHE (included as appendix 1 to the minutes). M. Brooks commented that the assumption is that the national economy can continue to be sustained by growth. In the long term, from an economic point of view, continuous growth cannot be sustained. She asked if there is a long-term plan in place for looking at economic stability and sustainability for this University above and beyond a one-time increase in income taxes; or, is the plan to continue to go back for more? A. Karnes believes higher education needs to get back on track. It has the lost market share of state revenues and is below what it received in 1992. In the past, if there was additional revenue allocated to education, K-12 received two-thirds and higher education received one-third; that is no longer the case. Higher Education is going down each year, while K-12 receives increases. He is not saying that giving to K-12 is a bad thing, but the state is not maintaining its responsibility. The very structure of the system is actually in crisis. The state could end up with a much weaker higher education system if it continues on this course for another three or four years. M. Brooks asked if that is what faculty should be talking about to local representatives--that there needs to be a structural change in the funding of higher education. A. Karnes responded that it is, adding that Representative Mike Bost is very aware of the funding situation.

A. Karnes reported that at a press conference in Chicago earlier today, all 14 presidents and chancellors issued a letter to the Governor and the Controller stating they have not been paid the three quarters of a billion dollars owed to them. They want a schedule of when they will receive the money. In addition, an editorial in the Sun-Times came out in favor of the bond bill; so, things seem to be moving right now. If it will actually happen, though, he does not know. P. Howze believes going to see the legislators is one of best things to do; go enough so they remember the face. A. Karnes noted that what he hears again and again from senators and representatives is that they do not hear anyone advocating for higher education. [Employees] need to put something in their legislator's ear.

4. E. Hellgren reported the Graduate Council met on March 4 and approved three resolutions: a) the Geosciences Ph.D. proposal; b) the Research Indirect Cost (IDC) Return Distribution, which was mainly to increase awareness of an option already available for faculty members who bring in or propose a grant. They have the option of negotiating for some of the indirect return with the chair or dean; and c) electronic access of research papers through Open Access SIUC. The committee chaired by Deans Carlson and Koropchak continues to explore the possibility of depositing research papers, journal articles and other documents that faculty produce into Open Access. The research papers would be from masters works that do not require a thesis. G. Boulukos asked if [the committee] is still negotiating the terms [for faculty publications]. E. Hellgren responded that the committee continues to meet on that issue because they cannot come to a consensus (which is why it is taking so long).

P. Howze clarified that the research paper is often used as a substitute or a surrogate for a masters thesis (the non-thesis/final paper project option). He indicated that another unresolved issue is who will do the work with regard to obtaining copyright, intellectual property and the like. This is the reason why a resolution has not been forthcoming. The intent is to have a joint resolution with the Graduate Council so that everyone will be aware of what is happening. P. Howze did not believe the issues would be resolved during this term, and a joint resolution will likely have to be brought forth next term.

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

S. Kumar reported the Council is looking into two items: One is the summary of responses to the actions that have been taken by the Senate. These are available on the Senate's website. He suggested Senators look to see if there are any items they believe need responses or additional information. If so, please [let him know]. The second item relates to obtaining more support for the First Year Experience. Some discussion has taken place within the Council, but no resolution was prepared. The Senate may want to develop another resolution in the future.

GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE -- G. Spittler, Chair

G. Spittler presented for approval the Resolution to Approve a Special Rule of Order for the Method of Collecting Ballots for the Election of Senators to the Faculty Senate (included as Attachment A to the Agenda). He explained that the Senate has currently been operating under a special rule which states how Senate elections will be conducted whether electronically or by paper balloting. The special rule currently in place was basically to determine how well electronic collection of ballots would work; thus, it was used for the spring 2009 election of senators. What the committee is now recommending is the result of a lengthy study led by R. Hughes in which he examined the various means available to the Senate for collecting ballots. The resolution itself leaves open which particular electronic method to be used, though at present it appears that the Blackboard system is viable for the immediate future. Therefore, rather than having to revisit the issue in another three or four years when there is something more efficient, the committee would like to leave that decision to the people who would be conducting the election.

P. Stockdale asked if process will apply to the Judicial Review Board elections (no); if not, she suggested a friendly amendment to the "resolved" to include those elections. S. Kumar suggested deleting the words "nomination and election ballots" since [any ballots] would be counted electronically. J. Allen believes the more important concern is how few people participate in the elections. He would prefer to know which modality faculty would prefer that will elicit their participation and cooperation in giving the Senate a more powerful voice. G. Spittler agreed that the important question is why there is such slight participation in the elections. What the committee examined was how it could ease not only the burden of conducting the elections, but also the process of casting a vote.

R. Hughes pointed out that the reason for the resolution is that the Senate's Operating Paper states that the Senate should adopt special rules of order prescribing the method by which ballots will be collected. By adopting the [proposed resolution], the special rule for conducting the elections electronically will stay in effect until such time as the Senate adopts another rule. This will alleviate the committee having to propose a new special rule every year. If, in the future, the Senate decides to return to a mailed ballot, another special rule can be proposed at that time. S. Ebbs asked what would happen if, hypothetically, the Senate adopts this rule and then Blackboard did not work one semester. Would the nomination and election process be paralyzed until this body met again to vote back the other way? He questioned whether the Senate should just vote on the process each year or leave it at electronic and hope [the system does not go down].

After further discussion, it was suggested that JRB elections not be included in the "resolved" because the special rule of order pertains only to the Faculty Senate election process. Rather, new wording should be proposed and incorporated into a relevant section of the Operating Paper that would cover JRB elections and other kinds of balloting, such as for referenda. S. Kumar suggested amending the "resolved" so that it read, "...resolved that election of senators to the Faculty Senate be conducted electronically." In answer to the question posed by S. Ebbs, if Blackboard should not be an option, then another form of electronic voting could be used.

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

UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION POLICY COMMITTEE -- L. DiLalla, Chair

L. DiLalla presented for approval the Resolution to Recommend Approval of the RME for the Addition of a Minor in Photography, College of Mass Communication and Media Arts (included as Attachment B to the Agenda). G. Spittler asked if there was a feel for how many students the minor would attract. L. DiLalla responded she did not know, but some queries were done of students, and it was found that there is much interest in the minor.

Resolution was approved on a voice vote.

ELECTIONS COMMITTEE --S. Kumar, Chair

S. Kumar reported: 1) the deadline for return of the referendum on the proposed changes to the Operating Paper of the Faculty and the Faculty Senate is March 8. If approved, the changes would increase the number of non tenure-track seats on the Senate from two to four; 2) tenured and tenure- track faculty elections will be conducted electronically in seven colleges. The non tenure-track faculty elections will be conducted once the Operating Paper changes have been formally approved; 3) every year, the calculation is done on how many full-time faculty equivalent (FTE) there are in each college. This number determines how many Senate seats are assigned to each college. Based on the information to date, which may change slightly, the College of Mass Communication and Media Arts may gain one seat, and Liberal Arts may lose one seat.

BUDGET COMMITTEE -- None.

FACULTY STATUS AND WELFARE COMMITTEE -- None.

COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES --None.

OLD BUSINESS - None.

NEW BUSINESS

1. P. Stockdale reported that the incoming chancellor has been visiting the campus every month for a few days. She would like for the Senate to extend an invitation to her to [attend an upcoming meeting]. P. Howze responded that his numerous attempts to do so have not met with much success. P. Stockdale urged P. Howze to continue his efforts.

2. J. Brown wanted it on the record that the Senate approves and takes pride in all the students who are working voluntarily to raise resources for the Haiti project. It sometimes goes unremarked when students do these kinds of things, and the University should be proud of their service commitment. There are also faculty and those in the creative writing program and performing arts who are making contributions, and they are to be commended as well.

3. J. Allen reported the North Central Accreditation site visit team will be on campus March 22-24, and they would like to visit the Senate on March 22. He is aware that it may not be the best time to meet with them. Instead, he will look into scheduling the meeting at the Senate's normal 1PM Tuesday time (March 23) in the hope of getting the largest number of people to attend. M. Lamb asked if there was some way Senators should prepare for the meeting. J. Allen responded that he would like to spend a few minutes at the next Senate meeting discussing how to prepare for the visit. The most important preparation, however, would be to become familiar with the introduction to the Self-Study and to attend the meeting. The Senate can then discuss what it would like to do as a body. P. Howze indicated he will add J. Allen [to the top of the agenda for the next meeting].

L. Brooten asked if the NCA team will visit colleges or departments, and if so, will faculty be notified of the visits. J. Allen responded that the team will be visiting each college and certainly each dean. J. Allen believes it unlikely the team will meet with others in the colleges, but that may be up to the visiting team members, who would then inform the dean. Faculty will have an opportunity to attend an open meeting on March 22.

M. Lamb commented that many thanks are owed to all those who have worked really hard on the accreditation document. J. Allen in particular, has done yeoman work, and the Senate should formally thank him for all his efforts. J. Allen suggested the Senate may want to wait until the process is complete.

4. P. Howze reported that he will be taking the sexual harassment training as a member of the Chancellor's Executive Committee. He will take extensive notes. P. Stockdale asked who was doing the training. The response was the Diversity office and Deborah Nelson from General Counsel.

ANNOUNCEMENTS - None.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 2:35 p.m.

Respectfully submitted, 
Mary Ellen Lamb, Secretary

MEL:ba