Minutes of the Faculty Senate

Meeting convened at 1:03 p.m. by Terry Clark, President.

ROLL CALL

Members present: Philip Anton, Connie J. Baker, Jason Bond (for Ahmad Fakhoury), George E. Boulukos, Joe Cheatwood, Rita Cheng (ex officio), Tsuchin Chu, Terry Clark, Lucian E. Dervan, Bruce A. DeVantier, Mark J. Dolan, Steven C. Goetz, Laura Halliday, Edward J. Heist, Eric J. Holzmueller, Andrea Imre, Carolyn G. Kingcade, Meera Komarraju, Kelsy Kretschmer (for Rachel B. Whaley), James A. MacLean, John McSorley, AKM Mahbub Morshed (for Sajal Lahiri), Howard Motyl, John W. Nicklow (ex officio), James W. Phegley, Stacey Sloboda, Rachel Stocking, Brooke H. H. Thibeault, Stacy D. Thompson, Lyle J. White.

Members absent: Carl Flowers (ex officio), Allan Karnes (ex officio).

Members absent without proxy: Anthony T. Fleege, Qingfeng Ge, Edward Gershburg, Holly Hurlburt, John T. Legier, Nancy L. Martin, Nicole K. Roberts, Mingqing Xiao.

Visitors and guests: James Allen (Associate Provost for Academic Programs).

MINUTES

The minutes from the 2012-2013 Faculty Senate meeting on April 23, 2013, were approved as presented. The minutes from the 2013-2014 Faculty Senate meeting on April 23, 2013, were approved as presented.

REPORTS

1. T. Clark reported he attended the Board of Trustees meeting on May 9. There was some sentiment among the trustees to give a 0% tuition increase; however, the campus was granted 3%. Fee increases were also approved. New trustee Randal Thomas was voted in as chair. T. Clark also reported that he attended commencement, noting the ceremonies are looking better and moving faster.

2. Chancellor Cheng reported: a) the campus is in summer mode and is laying out what needs to be done before students return; b) she sent out an end-of-year message filled with good news about recent accomplishments on campus; c) the strategic planning process came to a conclusion, and now the second phase is to monitor its progress. They will quickly go into a reporting mode of where the campus is at with its goals and what needs to be done in order to accomplish them in an appropriate time; d) the research publication has received a lot of very good press and national attention. She sent it to all her peers in both the APLU and AASCU; they are the presidents and chancellors who are filling out the U.S. News and World Report. There are some good indicators in that publication, most notably that the University's graduation rate and alumni giving have increased. Once the first year retention rate comes more in line with peer universities, she believes the enrollment issues will be an historical rather than a current challenge. She noted that all estimates have the freshman class being way up; e) the issues of pensions and budget still linger. The cost share for pensions will be a discussion topic tomorrow in Springfield. The chancellors and presidents have embraced the "Six Simple Steps," in which employers would pick up some of the pension costs with some concession of not seeing a continual decline in appropriations; f) according to Physical Plant, there are 222 separate construction projects on campus this summer; g) she listened to the discussion at last month's Senate meeting that centered around the Information Technology (IT) charge. The goal is to rationalize the cost across the campus, to smooth it out so each unit will know what that cost will be. It was decided that students would not be charged, so the cost would come out to a little under $100 a month for high-end users and $50 month for other users. Those bills went out to the deans and fiscal officers earlier this year; h) the Vice Chancellor for Research has announced his retirement and will leave at the end of May. She has met with the deans, the center directors and individual researchers on campus and will be moving forward on an interim basis with an interim dean of the Graduate School and an interim Vice Chancellor for Research. They will spend the year sorting out the budgets and the work in each of those areas to see whether there should be a combined model or a separate model. Both areas are important to examine and figure out because graduate enrollments are soft and research external funding, in particular, has gone down.

QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION

1. G. Boulukos thanked Chancellor Cheng for the information on the IT fee. He asked if she could clarify who would be a high-end user. Chancellor Cheng responded the determination would be based on classification, regardless of whether or not a computer is used in the job. Faculty would be high-end users, and all Plant and Service Operations staff would be other; and there are different classifications in between. T. Clark clarified that it will be based on personnel rather than work stations. Chancellor Cheng agreed, noting it is the same calculation used to allocate the health insurance costs across campus; it will be the same set of individuals. Provost Nicklow indicated that the bills would go out at the same time.

2. B. Thibeault asked if there is a plan on how to cover all the new freshman UCOL classes. Chancellor Cheng responded there is a plan. Provost Nicklow indicated that he will be teaching a UCOL class and has asked all the deans to teach one. He also asked the deans to ask their chairs to teach a class. The majority of the UCOL classes are already covered, and there is scenario-planning on how many will be needed. G. Boulukos commented that having a larger incoming freshman class will have some downward pressures on staffing. Is there a game plan on how to shift resources to cover the large number of classes needed for incoming students? Chancellor Cheng responded that both Math and English have game plans. There will be a need, once a section is filled for some of the other gateway freshman courses, to either examine whether the large lecture becomes larger or whether another section opens. All those things will be as enrollments come in this summer. There should be some flexibility in departments because of the small senior class, so there may be a need to shift some instructional resources; that would be a chair's decision. She believes people are looking at fall enrollment calculations as they come in to get a sense of that.

3. A. Imre asked when the IT surcharge will be implemented. Chancellor Cheng responded it will take effect July 1.

REPORTS (cont.)

3. Provost Nicklow reported: a) currently, there are 4% more applications relative to last year; admitted students are still running 9% ahead. Registered students as of now are flat, but other indicators such as housing contracts and orientations are all looking positive. The conversation with deans now has been about yield. Each college has been asked to take on a yield campaign simultaneously while the deans/associate deans/chairs are hopefully making calls to students. There is a separate group for peer calling through the call center to reach out to students who are on the fence. The University currently has the highest number of applications ever as a result of the over 5.5 million pieces of material that are now being sent out over the entire United States; b) Law School enrollment is still matching national trends, i.e., applications are down 27%. They are nearly flat on admitted students, but total deposits received are up 28%. The LSAT scores have changed by one point (down) but GPAs have not changed; c) graduate student enrollment continues to be a concern. Total admissions are now down a third of a percent. Graduate student enrollment needs some sustained energy throughout the summer. The Provost noted that international students are up overall on the graduate level; d) he received six applications for the Provost Fellow program. Ruth Anne Rehfeldt from the College of Education and Human Services has been selected to be the Provost Fellow for the fall. She will work with him, Jim Allen and David DiLalla in various areas that will give her experience with administration, assessment, enrollment, etc.; e) classroom renovations are ongoing. The plan is to have 35 of the 60 classrooms done by August, and he will push to see if he can get a higher number; f) a project is being piloted this summer to allow students to register for only three hours over the summer instead of the usual six hours. However, he noted that from a financial aid perspective, students must still be registered for six hours. The reason they are going for three hours is because financial aid is pretty well burned up by summer, so he would like to see what that does in terms of student work and registrations; g) in talking with Lipman- Hearn and looking at best practices, the campus is going to pursue an enrollment deposit and attempt to match that with housing. One of the best indicators of enrollment that universities have is an enrollment deposit that is due May 1. The University is actually an anomaly in that such a deposit is not required. There used to be one long ago, but it was seen as a barrier to students registering; h) at the Board of Trustees meeting, there were some new tuition rates passed for veterans. Honorably discharged veterans or reservists will receive in-state tuition no matter where they are located. In addition, high-achiever transfer students will receive the in-state rate.

QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION (cont.)

1. G. Boulukos asked about the change in plans for summer session for next year. Provost Nicklow responded that last year, there was a task force appointed to investigate summer trends because, frankly, summer session is broken. There have been dramatic declines in enrollment because students are not staying and nothing is being done differently. He recently appointed Dean Mickey LaTour (College of Agricultural Sciences) as an unpaid special assistant to the Provost because he had been associate dean of summer school/distance education at Purdue and had great successes. After conversations with the Budget Office and taking a look at demand, they ran stacks of data showing which courses are high demand, what the return on those investments should be and what they are. The campus will move towards a cost recovery model similar to the distance education model for summer. The units and colleges will have a lot of insight in terms of proposals, but he wanted to have a central office to talk about what the returns should be and to show which investments are the best. T. Clark indicated that when M. LaTour has something to report, he will be invited to speak to the Senate. Provost Nicklow added that summer needs to be marketed along with spring. It was too late to do this year, but for summer 2014, he would like to launch the summer schedule the same time registration opens for spring.

2. [A. Morshed] asked why the enrollment deposit is not considered an obstacle; what is the difference now? Provost Nicklow responded the difference is there are experts on the outside looking at this, and they are looking at best practices. The fact is if all the barriers were removed, it would be unclear what the classes would look like, and it would be unclear where to focus effort. Best practice indicates an enrollment deposit--not $500, but $150 or so--that could be part of the bursar bill and that financial aid would cover. It is an investment deposit to hold the space. L. White expressed appreciation that [the administration] is taking a look at summer school. It is an important feature of the programs available in the College of Education and Human Services, particularly for teachers who have to take classes either in the evenings or during the summer to complete their graduate degrees. A lot of the college's programs have gone to summer school being an integral part of the curriculum, so in order to get students through in a reasonable amount of time; they have to be full time students in the summer as well as fall and spring. It is very important for them to keep summer school viable. Provost Nicklow indicated that, given the added pressure on time to degree, it is definitely part of the solution.

3. M. Komarraju asked if enrollment goes up in the fall, how much flexibility will there be in terms of GA budgets. There are some departments that have lost faculty and will have to count on their graduate students to teach the courses. At the same time, there are a lot more students coming into intro courses that will require GA coverage. Will there be enough trickling down [of GAs] to the departments? Provost Nicklow responded there is no pot of money; however, believes [GAs] are a part of the scenario planning. As it gets closer, he will be able to determine the dollar value and make adjustments in order to make sure the needs are met. Chancellor Cheng noted that until the overall enrollment goes up at the undergraduate level, there is no expectation of additional resources.

4. S. Sloboda asked where the new classrooms are located and if there are any in Lawson. Chancellor Cheng responded that there are 12 teaching labs and 61 classrooms; they are all over campus, including Lawson. S. Sloboda asked if there is a way for faculty who want certain resources in the classroom to find out whether these exist in the new classrooms. Provost Nicklow responded that Karla Berry from the Center for Teaching Excellence is somewhat directing this effort. She has conducted focus groups and has been working with faculty and getting a lot of feedback. He suggested dropping her an email and asking her to visit a classroom; she would be able to let S. Sloboda know. Chancellor Cheng added that when they are finished, 91% of classrooms will have technology. T. Chu asked if there are any criteria for assigning the classrooms based on need. Provost Nicklow responded that the person requesting the classroom is supposed to identify those needs, and there is a way to do that. He explained that about a year ago, he talked with the Senate about R25 automatic scheduling. R25 is a system the campus already had that was paid for, but was not being used. However, the campus diverted away from that system because it was discovered that the auxiliaries on campus are using a different automatic scheduling software called EMS. It was decided to use that software on the academic side as well so anyone can schedule any room, including classrooms, on campus automatically. So, someone within a unit or dean's office can make those requests; and if faculty have special needs, they would mark them down. T. Clark asked if the system is live now. Provost Nicklow responded it is not. Once they found out about EMS, there was no point in investing in another system. They pulled back and did an evaluation of which way they wanted to go as one campus. Once that decision is made, he believes over the next year the campus will transition to EMS as one unit.

EXECUTIVE COUNCIL

1. J. MacLean reported on the May 7 meeting: a) pension reform was discussed, and it was decided that a resolution would be drafted; b) L. White discussed concerns about the lengthy RME that proposes reorganization within the College of Education and Human Services. At its root, the proposal seeks to reduce administrative costs; create alternative routes for collaboration between disciplines by moving units to departmental homes which, at least on paper, they seem to be more compatible with; and improve the cost effectiveness ratios of some of the smaller departments by merging them with larger ones. As J. MacLean understands it, that might be somehow tied into improving the perception on IBHE metrics. As far as he knows, the effected faculty are to vote on the policy tomorrow; c) B. Thibeault asked if there was any update on the Tuition on Grants policy that created some furor last fall when it was implemented. Among some of the Senate and faculty at large who are participating in [extramurally] funded research, a committee has been convened to analyze the policy. The basic idea would be to determine i) whether it was based on erroneous or incomplete information concerning the policies at peer institutions; ii) the potential revenue the policy might generate; iii) the impact it would have on funded investigators; iv) grant mechanisms and if [the policy] can really be altered to account for the increased costs; and v) the expected outcomes on graduate student enrollment. Subcommittees were formed to address each of those five issues within the Tuition on Grants Committee. The subcommittees met many times at the end of last year and a couple of times at the beginning of this year, but for reasons unknown to him, the committee as a whole has not met for a few months. They did circulate a draft report that combines all the outcomes of those subcommittees, and presumably it will eventually go to the Graduate Council and the Senate. J. MacLean noted he gave the update because he is on the Tuition on Grants Committee.

2. G. Boulukos presented for approval the Resolution on Illinois State Pension Reform (included as Attachment A to the Agenda). He reported receiving from A. Karnes a friendly amendment to the third Whereas, which contained erroneous information. He read the resolution as revised. B. Thibeault indicated the "Resolved" mentions that there are two current options. She asked about the "Six Steps" option. Chancellor Cheng responded that the "Six Simple Steps" was the University of Illinois Policy Institute white paper that the presidents and chancellors of the Illinois public institutions endorsed. It has not yet become a bill. There are features in the document that are being advocated for in adaptations to either of the proposed bills. G. Boulukos clarified that SB1 is the Madigan bill and has passed the House while SB2404, the Cullerton bill, has passed the Senate. Since each bill has passed one of the two bodies, it seemed like an appropriate time to endorse one or the other. They can hope for further improvements, but it seems likely one of them will become law.

B. DeVantier commented that he is uncertain he fully agrees with the assessment that the second bill is likely to pass constitutional muster. In "State Week in Review," that was called into question. He believes the second bill is clearly more beneficial, but questioned whether endorsing SB2404 would mean they are buying into the constitutionality of this approach, which he believes is questionable. "State Week in Review" categorized the bills as a "gun to your head" choice. G. Boulukos agreed with much of B. DeVantier's comments, but pointed out the wording of the resolution is that it is "expected to pass constitutional muster." In his mind, this does not constitute an endorsement by the Senate as a constitutional status. The problem is that SB1, in the opinion of many experts, is clearly in direct violation of the constitution, which has provisions in it that pension benefits cannot be given away. The legal argument being given for the constitutionality of SB1 is that the state is in an emergency situation; therefore, the state government should be able to suspend provisions of the constitution as is done under military law. There are questions as to the constitutionality of SB2404, but there is actually a legal argument for its constitutionality, which is that it exchanges certain benefits for other benefits. This argument does not bear a whole lot of scrutiny, but it bears a lot more than the martial law analogy. The point of the resolution is to endorse one of the two bills. In a situation where one of these bills is very likely to pass, one of them is clearly far superior. M. Komarraju called the question; seconded by S. Sloboda.

Resolution, as amended, was approved 19-1-2 on a show of hands vote. [see appendix to these minutes.]

COMMITTEE ON COMMITTEES - L. White, Chair

1. L. White presented for approval the list of Standing Committee Assignments (included as Attachment B to the Agenda).

Standing committee assignments were approved 24-0-0 on a show of hands vote.

2. L. White presented for approval the following nominations to the Chancellor's Planning and Budget Advisory Committee: George Boulukos, Associate Professor, English; and James MacLean, Assistant Professor, Physiology. He reported that these positions have traditionally been filled by the chair of the Senate Budget Committee and the Vice President of the Senate.

Nominations were approved 24-0-0 on a show of hands vote.

BUDGET COMMITTEE -- No report.

UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION POLICY COMMITTEE -- B. DeVantier, Chair

B. DeVantier reported that he is attempting to coordinate schedules with the committee in order to meet over the summer, as there are some items the committee needs to consider. He also reported that he was notified by the former UEPC chair that, as the new UEPC chair, he is also an ex officio member of the Core Curriculum Executive Committee.

FACULTY STATUS AND WELFARE COMMITTEE -- E. Heist/H. Hurlburt, Co-Chairs

E. Heist reported the committee met on April 30 to elect officers. They will plan to meet again before the July Senate meeting.

GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE -- B. Thibeault, Chair

B. Thibeault reported the committee will not meet until September; at that time, they will collect data on the Judicial Review Board. She has already collected some data and has provided a list of JRB members to the committee. They will read through the Senate's Operating Paper to make sure she understands the purpose of the JRB. The committee will also need to read the Faculty Association and Non Tenure Track Faculty Association contracts because both refer to the JRB as well.

OLD BUSINESS - None.

NEW BUSINESS

M. Komarraju acknowledged the contributions of Becky (Molina) Armstrong, who has provided support to the Faculty Senate over the last 31 years. On behalf of the Senate, M. Komarraju presented her with a retirement card and gift.

ANNOUNCEMENTS -- None.

ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 2:01 p.m.

Respectfully submitted, 
Mark J. Dolan, Secretary

MJD:ba